On 14 May, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2016, Don Lewis wrote: > >> Log: >> Revert r299584: >> Mark usage() as __dead2 so that Coverity doesn't think that execution >> continues after the call and uses a negative array subscript. >> >> Requested by: bde > > Thanks. > > What was the problem that confused Coverity?
It sees that demux_cmd() can return -1. It takes the true branch of "if (cmd == -1)" and calls usage. It then falls through and thinks that cmds[] is getting indexed with a negative value on line 423. Taking a closer look at the comments that Coverity added makes me wonder if changing the test to "if (cmd < 0)" might unconfuse it. > This reminds me that even compilers can see that usage() doesn't return, > by looking ahead and even inlining usage(). This breaks debugging and > profiling. clang doesn't support the -funit-at-a-time and > -fno-inline-functions-called-once needed to reduce its excessive inlining. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
