From 4ee61787c81c9528bbb35ce669563a9280e3c97a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: tb Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 06:05:50 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Curious to see if explicitly ignoring the return value appeases Coverity --- lib/libcrypto/cmac/cmac.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/libcrypto/cmac/cmac.c b/lib/libcrypto/cmac/cmac.c index 42f630c1499..86b1b2d5bee 100644 --- a/lib/libcrypto/cmac/cmac.c +++ b/lib/libcrypto/cmac/cmac.c @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -/* $OpenBSD: cmac.c,v 1.20 2024/01/28 20:57:15 tb Exp $ */ +/* $OpenBSD: cmac.c,v 1.21 2024/01/29 06:05:50 tb Exp $ */ /* Written by Dr Stephen N Henson (steve@openssl.org) for the OpenSSL * project. */ @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ void CMAC_CTX_cleanup(CMAC_CTX *ctx) { if (ctx->cipher_ctx != NULL) - EVP_CIPHER_CTX_reset(ctx->cipher_ctx); + (void)EVP_CIPHER_CTX_reset(ctx->cipher_ctx); explicit_bzero(ctx->tbl, EVP_MAX_BLOCK_LENGTH); explicit_bzero(ctx->k1, EVP_MAX_BLOCK_LENGTH); explicit_bzero(ctx->k2, EVP_MAX_BLOCK_LENGTH); -- 2.20.1