----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > To: "Jan Stancek" <[email protected]> > Cc: "LTP List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, 19 March, 2013 6:43:52 PM > Subject: Re: [LTP] Coverity report for ltp-20130109 > > Hi! > > I ran it for current LTP stable (20130109) (on top of RHEL6.4) > > and I'm sharing results here: > > http://jan.stancek.eu/coverity/ltp-20130109-1.el6.err.xz > > I've looked at the results briefly and allready found and fixed one > (quite stupid) bug in doio.c. > > But there seems to be quite a number of false possitives because LTP > does things that are usually wrong intentionally (i.e. NULL > dereference). We could probably mask most of the cases from the > compiler > by setting such variables as volatile, but I'm not really sure if > it's > worth of it.
I think it's not worth it. If we find there is high number of false positives, I can try different parameters on next run. These first ones were with "--all", which likely includes all sorts of warnings. Regards, Jan > > -- > Cyril Hrubis > [email protected] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
