On 08/28/2014 03:28 PM, John Ferlan wrote: > After perusing the pile of 70 or so warnings - these two stuck out as > ones that were low hanging fruit and not false positives. > > Many of the remaining "issues" are false positives or perhaps even > bugs in Coverity, but I understand why they're being flagged. Freeing > memory from counted lists where the incoming count must be zero based > on code path - for some reason Coverity flags them because the incoming > list memory is NULL and the for loop deref would be bad. The issue > is Coverity doesn't seem to dig deep enough to determine that the > count and list pointer are linked, sigh (yes, a lot of those). > > John Ferlan (2): > virnetserverservice: Resolve Coverity ARRAY_VS_SINGLETON > qemu_driver: Resolve Coverity FORWARD_NULL > > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 3 +-- > src/rpc/virnetserverservice.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >
Both are now pushed. John -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
