https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37127
Bug ID: 37127 Summary: PVS-Studio Error: Unreliable tests Product: Wine Version: 1.7.22 Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs@winehq.org Reporter: lukebenes@hotmail.com
PVS-Studio identifies Unreliable tests. Some of the modules' folders contain the test folder with source files for tests. Debug information is printed through the 'ok' macro. Here are a few suspicious fragments:
V501 There are identical sub-expressions to the left and to the right of the '==' operator: ddsd3.lpSurface == ddsd3.lpSurface dsurface.c 272
... ok(ddsd3.lpSurface == ddsd3.lpSurface, //<== "lpSurface from GetSurfaceDesc(%p) differs\ from the one returned by Lock(%p)\n", ddsd3.lpSurface, ddsd2.lpSurface); //<== ...
It very much looks like a typo. I suspect this code should compare the same variables that are printed.
V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. url.c 767
... ok(size == no_callback ? 512 : 13, "size=%d\n", size); ...
The precedence of the "==" operator is higher than that of '?:', so the size variable is not compared to the values 512 and 13. The expression is always true as it evaluates either to 512 or 13, which means this check doesn't check anything.
Other similar fragments:
V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. string.c 1086 V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. string.c 1111 V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. reader.c 761 V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. protocol.c 2928 V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. dde.c 1594 V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '==' operator. reader.c 761
details on the V501 error here: http://www.viva64.com/en/d/0090/ details on the V502 error here: http://www.viva64.com/en/d/0091/