Any Coverity wizards?

[Gary E. Miller]

Yo Hal!

On Tue, 05 Dec 2023 20:40:46 -0800
Hal Murray via devel <devel at ntpsec.org> wrote:

> I expect the comment on the previous line to tell Coverity to not
> complain about this case.
> 
> Is there a typo or such that I'm missing?
> 
> 149        /* coverity[checked_return] */
>   CID 462307 (#1 of 1): Unchecked return value (CHECKED_RETURN)
>   15. check_return: Calling CMAC_Update without checking return value
> (as is done elsewhere 5 out of 6 times).
> 150        CMAC_Update(cmac_ctx, data, (unsigned int)datalen);


AFAIK, that override should work, but does not.  Maybe "checked_return"
should be in CAPS?

The suggestions of adding (void) should work.  Ir actually check the
return.

RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
	gem at rellim.com  Tel:+1 541 382 8588

	    Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
    "If you can't measure it, you can't improve it." - Lord Kelvin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 246 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20231206/0f698a1f/attachment.bin>