commit 680646e0de29454f92d57bc3a4895d75c95e158c Author: Sebastian Hahn sebastian@torproject.org Date: Wed Jun 8 21:27:32 2011 +0200
Don't use signed 1-bit bitfields
This was harmless, we never compared it to anything but itself or 0. But Coverity complained, and it had a point. --- changes/coverity_maint | 1 + src/or/policies.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/changes/coverity_maint b/changes/coverity_maint index fd8c440..6d60355 100644 --- a/changes/coverity_maint +++ b/changes/coverity_maint @@ -4,4 +4,5 @@ o Minor bugfixes: - Add some forgotten return value checks during unit tests. Found by coverity. + - Don't use 1-bit wide signed bit fields. Found by coverity.
diff --git a/src/or/policies.c b/src/or/policies.c index e48f420..c870360 100644 --- a/src/or/policies.c +++ b/src/or/policies.c @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ typedef struct policy_summary_item_t { uint16_t prt_max; /**< Highest port number to accept/reject. */ uint64_t reject_count; /**< Number of IP-Addresses that are rejected to this port range. */ - int accepted:1; /** Has this port already been accepted */ + unsigned int accepted:1; /** Has this port already been accepted */ } policy_summary_item_t;
/** Private networks. This list is used in two places, once to expand the