On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 12:18:11 +0100 Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 01:16:57AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote: > > diff --git a/src/evaluate.c b/src/evaluate.c > > index 55591f5f3526..208250715e1f 100644 > > --- a/src/evaluate.c > > +++ b/src/evaluate.c > > @@ -136,6 +136,11 @@ static int byteorder_conversion(struct eval_ctx *ctx, struct expr **expr, > > > > if ((*expr)->byteorder == byteorder) > > return 0; > > + > > + /* Conversion for EXPR_CONCAT is handled for single composing ranges */ > > + if ((*expr)->etype == EXPR_CONCAT) > > + return 0; > > Are you also sure this is correct? Yes, I think so: if we add a set with a concatenation of three elements, byteorder_conversion() will be called three times with (*expr)->etype == EXPR_VALUE (which is what we might actually need to convert), and then once with EXPR_CONCAT, for which we have nothing to do. > This code was probably not exercised before with non-range > concatenations. I've seen it called for ranges in general. Do you mean we'd never get past: if ((*expr)->byteorder == byteorder) return 0; ? -- Stefano
