Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > quite a lot of people have looked at Postgres with Coverity > already. If Clang is throwing up lots and lots of warnings, the > odds are *very* high that most of them are false positives. > Running through such a list to see if there's anything real isn't > all that exciting a prospect.
Here is the summary of what was reported: All Bugs: 313 API Argument with 'nonnull' attribute passed null: 13 Dead store Dead assignment: 65 Dead increment: 11 Logic error Assigned value is garbage or undefined: 19 Branch condition evaluates to a garbage value: 2 Dereference of null pointer: 98 Division by zero: 15 Out-of-bound array access: 1 Result of operation is garbage or undefined: 9 Stack address stored into global variable: 1 Uninitialized argument value: 74 Memory Error Double free: 1 Memory leak: 1 Unix API Allocator sizeof operand mismatch: 3 Does anything stand out as something that is particularly worth looking into? Does anything here seem worth assuming is completely bogus because of the Coverity and Valgrind passes? -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
