https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6874
Chris Maynard <christopher.maynard@xxxxxxxxx> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #8 from Chris Maynard <christopher.maynard@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-20 18:40:13 PDT ---
Coverity reports a missing break between the PM_TYPE_AGGREGATE and
PM_TYPE_AGGREGATE_STATIC cases of the switch statement in
dissect_pcp_message_result() around line 986.
It looks like the code is identical for both cases. So, should the
proto_tree_add_item() call be deleted from the PM_TYPE_AGGREGATE case and allow
execution to fall-through to PM_TYPE_AGGREGATE_STATIC, or should there be some
difference in the code, in which case a break; statement should be added and
the the code fixed?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
