On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:48:21AM -0400, Jim Paris wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, for functions where it is expected that the passed in param
> > be non-NULL, then annotations are definitely the way togo. This
> > lets the compiler/checkers validate the callers instead, avoiding
> > the need to clutter th
Jim Paris wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:26:43PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > >> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
>> > >>
>> > >> if (
Does __attribute__((__nonnull__())) really cover the case we're
concerned about here?
No, not at all. Good catch.
Paolo
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:26:43PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > >> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
> > >>
> > >> if (conn &&
> > >> co
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:26:43PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> >> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
>> >>
>> >> if (conn &&
>> >> conn->d
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:26:43PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
> >>
> >> if (conn &&
> >> conn->driver &&
> >> STREQ (conn->
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
>>>
>>> if (conn &&
>>> conn->driver &&
>>> STREQ (conn->driver->name, "remote")) {
>>>
>>> So, in the el
Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
>>
>> if (conn &&
>> conn->driver &&
>> STREQ (conn->driver->name, "remote")) {
>>
>> So, in the else-branch, "conn" is guarantee
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:58:07AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
>
> if (conn &&
> conn->driver &&
> STREQ (conn->driver->name, "remote")) {
>
> So, in the else-branch, "conn" is guaranteed to be NULL.
> And dereferenc
Here's the test just before the else-if in the patch below:
if (conn &&
conn->driver &&
STREQ (conn->driver->name, "remote")) {
So, in the else-branch, "conn" is guaranteed to be NULL.
And dereferenced.
This may be only a theoretical risk, but if so,
the test of "conn" above
10 matches
Mail list logo