Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Warnint 64to32 6186 v23.3 #11904

Closed

Conversation

catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6186
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/7311

Describe changes:

  • fix -Wshorten-64-to-32 warnings for some files : output, stream

Some commits of #9840
#11580 next batch
#11705 with code review taken into account

Still to do afterwards :

  • detect
  • util

SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#2085

Ticket: 7311

If response_status_number is not a valid poisitive integer,
we should not try to parse it again, and fail again,
but just log the raw string.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 8, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 86.36364% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.62%. Comparing base (6ae5ae7) to head (4177221).
Report is 21 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #11904      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.60%   82.62%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         912      912              
  Lines      249342   249333       -9     
==========================================
+ Hits       205968   206012      +44     
+ Misses      43374    43321      -53     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 60.68% <78.78%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
livemode 18.72% <7.57%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
pcap 44.12% <56.06%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
suricata-verify 62.01% <83.33%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 58.93% <13.63%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@suricata-qa
Copy link

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline 23061

@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Please split the http logging change into it's own commit. It needs to be discussed as a feature, not as part of a series of compiler warning fixups.

@catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor Author

Please split the http logging change into it's own commit. It needs to be discussed as a feature, not as part of a series of compiler warning fixups.

It is in its own commit, but I guessed you meant its own PR, so : #11952

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants