[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9] x86/mm: Placate DEADCODE Coverity warning
>>> On 01.06.17 at 13:18, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Jan, > > On 01/06/17 12:15, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 01.06.17 at 13:09, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> On 31/05/17 14:23, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>> On 31/05/17 09:52, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On 05/22/2017 02:32 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 22.05.17 at 15:12, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>> _PAGE_GNTTAB is only used in debug builds of Xen; in release builds, >>>>>>> it has >>>>>>> the value 0. Coverity complains that "l1e_get_flags(l1e) & 0" is >>>>>>> logically >>>>>>> dead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Add an extra condition into the logic to skip the flag check if >>>>>>> _PAGE_GNTTAB >>>>>>> is 0. >>>>>> >>>>>> And this helps? To me "if ( 0 && ... )" and "if ( (x & 0) && ... )" look >>>>>> logically the same (i.e. I'd expect the same warnings to be triggered >>>>>> [or not]). >>>>> >>>>> I haven't seen any answer on this question. Andrew, does this patch >>>>> still hold for Xen 4.9? >>>> >>>> Sorry - it fell through the cracks, but yes, it does stand for 4.9. >>>> >>>> As to the "if ( 0 && ... )" and "if ( (x & 0) && ... )", one is very >>>> clearly a "short circuit every thing else if this value is zero", while >>>> the other looks like a programming mistake, which is also why I expect >>>> this to resolve Coverity's complaint. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, I can't be certain that this will resolve the issue until >>>> it gets committed, as I don't have a useful way to run Coverity on >>>> arbitrary non-debug builds. >>> >>> Are we running staging-4.* branch on Coverity? Looking at the git, I see >>> *coverity* branch only on unstable. >> >> Yes, so my suggestion would be to commit the patch on master, see >> if it helps, and if so consider backporting for 4.9. If it doesn't help, >> it should be reverted or replaced by something "better". > > Well master has now debug enabled and AFAIU the warning can only > occurred on non-debug build. So I am not sure how this would help to be > in master. Oh, good point. I think it would really be a good idea to have both debug and non-debug builds tested, which at once would avoid sudden bursts of issues when switching the default. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |