Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 57400: [NTOSKRNL] Coverity code defects fixes : - Cache: CID 701441 - Config: CIDs 716570, 716669, 716760 - Dbgk: Kdbg: CIDs 716571, 515128/9, 500432 - Ex: CIDs 50

2012-09-28 Thread Pierre Schweitzer
What's the purpose of such ASSERT? Modified: trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/fsrtl/notify.c URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/fsrtl/notify.c?rev=57400r1=57399r2=57400view=diff == ---

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 57400: [NTOSKRNL] Coverity code defects fixes : - Cache: CID 701441 - Config: CIDs 716570, 716669, 716760 - Dbgk: Kdbg: CIDs 716571, 515128/9, 500432 - Ex: CIDs 50

2012-09-28 Thread Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO
Hi ! It's an attempt to say to Coverity that the NotifyChange variable will NEVER be NULL after the allocation (as explained in the comment), because of the fact that the code uses POOL_RAISE_IF_ALLOCATION_FAILURE. Indeed, Coverity expected a check against NULL and fail if it is before the

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [hbelusca] 57400: [NTOSKRNL] Coverity code defects fixes : - Cache: CID 701441 - Config: CIDs 716570, 716669, 716760 - Dbgk: Kdbg: CIDs 716571, 515128/9, 500432 - Ex: CIDs 50

2012-09-28 Thread Pierre Schweitzer
Then, you'd rather mark it as false-positive in Coverity interface rather than adding redundant and useless check. Or, if Coverity supports it, annotate code. The issue here is Coverity, not the code. On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 11:34 +0200, Hermès BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO wrote: Hi ! It's an attempt to