On 28/01/2015 10:58, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> I examined the differences between local scans with and without a
> derived model file for GLib, to gauge what we're missing (the Coverity
> Scan service we use can't do derived model files).  Doesn't look bad,
> but a few missed memory leaks caught my attention.  I improved our
> model file to catch them (PATCH 1+2).  Topped off with PATCH 3 to
> catch mixing up g_free() and free().
> 
> Markus Armbruster (3):
>   coverity: Improve model for GLib memory allocation
>   coverity: Model GLib string allocation partially
>   coverity: Model g_free() isn't necessarily free()
> 
>  scripts/coverity-model.c | 228 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 193 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> 

Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>

It's missing a patch to add a MAINTAINERS entry though! :)

Paolo

Reply via email to