On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:44:14PM +0530, Susant Sahani wrote: > On 11/17/2014 10:39 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:36:53PM +0530, Susant Sahani wrote: > >>On 11/17/2014 10:26 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >>>On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 04:28:58PM +0530, Susant Sahani wrote: > >>>>--- > >>>> src/tty-ask-password-agent/tty-ask-password-agent.c | 2 +- > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>> > >>>>diff --git a/src/tty-ask-password-agent/tty-ask-password-agent.c > >>>>b/src/tty-ask-password-agent/tty-ask-password-agent.c > >>>>index e6dc84b..1fc792b 100644 > >>>>--- a/src/tty-ask-password-agent/tty-ask-password-agent.c > >>>>+++ b/src/tty-ask-password-agent/tty-ask-password-agent.c > >>>>@@ -376,8 +376,8 @@ static int wall_tty_block(void) { > >>>> return -ENOMEM; > >>>> > >>>> mkdir_parents_label(p, 0700); > >>>>- mkfifo(p, 0600); > >>>> > >>>>+ (void)mkfifo(p, 0600); > >>> > >>>You really aren't "fixing" anything in these patches, just merely > >>>papering over the Coverity issues. Which is fine, if you really want to > >>>do that, but don't think it's anything other than that... > >> > >>Yes my intention is to for coverity only Any way next line 'open' handling > >>the error case . > > > >I'm sorry, but I don't understand this sentance at all, can you rephrase > >it? > > > > Sorry let me rephrase it. This patch only for coverity . The next like of > mkfifo is open . > > (void)mkfifo(p, 0600); > fd = open(p, O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC|O_NONBLOCK|O_NOCTTY); > if (fd < 0) > return -errno; > > and open is handling the failure.
Then coverity should be fixed, don't paper over stupid bugs in tools for no reason. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel