On 2023-11-11 02:13, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Hi everyone,
I trimmed the thread a bit, to make this more readable.
> > > > > IMHO, the only viable option would be to have a configuration to
> > > > > keep
> > > > > ASSERT in production build for
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I trimmed the thread a bit, to make this more readable.
>
> > > > > > IMHO, the only viable option would be to have a configuration to
> > > > > > keep
> > > > > > ASSERT in production build for scanning tools.
> > > > >
> > > > >
On 08/11/2023 1:45 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2023-11-08 14:37, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 03/11/2023 5:58 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
>>> pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
>>> of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
Hi everyone,
I trimmed the thread a bit, to make this more readable.
IMHO, the only viable option would be to have a configuration to
keep
ASSERT in production build for scanning tools.
But wouldn't that then likely mean scanning to be done on builds not
also
used in production? Would
Hi Stefano,
On 10/11/2023 00:29, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Julien Grall wrote:
On 09/11/2023 07:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 14:33, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Jan,
On 08/11/2023 11:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2023-11-08
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 09/11/2023 07:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 08.11.2023 14:33, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >
> > > On 08/11/2023 11:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> > > > > On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
Hi Jan,
On 09/11/2023 07:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 14:33, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Jan,
On 08/11/2023 11:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may
On 08.11.2023 14:28, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2023-11-08 12:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
> pointer
On 08.11.2023 14:33, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 08/11/2023 11:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
>
On 2023-11-08 14:37, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 03/11/2023 5:58 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
detecting that such a condition is not possible
and also
On 03/11/2023 5:58 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
> pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
> of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
> detecting that such a condition is not possible
> and also provides a basic sanity check.
>
>
Hi Jan,
On 08/11/2023 11:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of
On 2023-11-08 12:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of xen/common/domain.c. This
On 08.11.2023 12:03, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
>>> pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
>>> of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
>>>
On 2023-11-08 09:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
detecting that such a condition is not possible
and also
On 03.11.2023 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
> pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
> of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
> detecting that such a condition is not possible
> and also provides a basic sanity check.
I
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2023-11-03 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> > Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
> > pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
> > of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
> > detecting that such a condition is not
On 2023-11-03 18:58, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
detecting that such a condition is not possible
and also provides a basic sanity check.
Suggested-by:
Static analysis tools may detect a possible null
pointer dereference at line 760 (the memcpy call)
of xen/common/domain.c. This ASSERT helps them in
detecting that such a condition is not possible
and also provides a basic sanity check.
Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini
---
The check may be later
19 matches
Mail list logo
