qemu-trivial
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] scripts: add sample model fil


From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] scripts: add sample model file for Coverity Scan
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:32:39 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0

On 03/19/2014 10:52 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This is the model file that is being used for the QEMU project's scans
> on scan.coverity.com.  It fixed about 30 false positives (10% of the
> total) and exposed about 60 new memory leaks.
> 
> The file is not automatically used; changes to it must be propagated
> to the website manually by an admin (right now Markus, Peter and me
> are admins).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>

Double S-o-B looks odd.


> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Red Hat, Inc.
> + *
> + * Authors:
> + *  Markus Armbruster <address@hidden>
> + *  Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> + *
> + * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or, at 
> your
> + * option, any later version.  See the COPYING file in the top-level 
> directory.

Aren't the license and authors blurbs usually in the other order?


> +
> +#define NULL (void *)0

Missing ()

> +#define assert(x) if (!(x)) __coverity_panic__();

Will this break any 'if () assert(); else {}' blocks?  Obviously, such
blocks already violate coding convention, but you might as well make
this definition safe to use for older code.

> +
> +static void __write(uint8_t *buf, int len)

Will the fact that you used 'int len' instead of 'size_t' bite us on 32-
vs. 64-bit?  Same for __read.


> +void *
> +g_malloc0 (size_t n_bytes)
> +{
> +    void *mem;
> +    __coverity_negative_sink__((ssize_t) n_bytes);
> +    mem = calloc(1, n_bytes == 0 ? 1 : n_bytes);
> +    if (!mem) __coverity_panic__ ();

Is it worth being consistent on spacing before (?

> +void g_free (void *mem)
> +{
> +    if (mem) {
> +        free(mem);
> +    }

Doesn't coverity already know that free(NULL) is a no-op, without you
having to repeat it?

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]