[Coverity CID: 220539] Improper use of negative value in tests/net/socket/misc/src/main.c

[zephyrbot]

Static code scan issues found in file:

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/tree/b86f7addae05add0db45d9b528854235fbb93a48/tests/net/socket/misc/src/main.c#L298

Category: Integer handling issues
Function: test_ipv4_so_bindtodevice
Component: Tests
CID: 220539

Details:

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/b86f7addae05add0db45d9b528854235fbb93a48/tests/net/socket/misc/src/main.c

292         peer_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
293         peer_addr.sin_port = htons(DST_PORT);
294         ret = inet_pton(AF_INET, CONFIG_NET_CONFIG_PEER_IPV4_ADDR,
295                 &peer_addr.sin_addr);
296         zassert_equal(ret, 1, "inet_pton failed");
297    
>>>     CID 220539:    (NEGATIVE_RETURNS)
>>>     "sock_s" is passed to a parameter that cannot be negative.
298         test_so_bindtodevice(sock_c, sock_s, (struct sockaddr *)&peer_addr,
299                      sizeof(peer_addr), (struct sockaddr *)&bind_addr,
300                      sizeof(bind_addr));
301     }
302    
303     void test_ipv6_so_bindtodevice(void)
292         peer_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
293         peer_addr.sin_port = htons(DST_PORT);
294         ret = inet_pton(AF_INET, CONFIG_NET_CONFIG_PEER_IPV4_ADDR,
295                 &peer_addr.sin_addr);
296         zassert_equal(ret, 1, "inet_pton failed");
297    
>>>     CID 220539:    (NEGATIVE_RETURNS)
>>>     "sock_c" is passed to a parameter that cannot be negative.
298         test_so_bindtodevice(sock_c, sock_s, (struct sockaddr *)&peer_addr,
299                      sizeof(peer_addr), (struct sockaddr *)&bind_addr,
300                      sizeof(bind_addr));
301     }
302    
303     void test_ipv6_so_bindtodevice(void)

Please fix or provide comments in coverity using the link:

https://scan9.coverity.com/reports.htm#v29271/p12996

Note: This issue was created automatically. Priority was set based on classification
of the file affected and the impact field in coverity. Assignees were set using the CODEOWNERS file.

[rlubos]

It's a false-positive. sock_c/sock_s cannot be negative at this point as the test verifies this earlier and asserts in case of a negative value.