Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Mar 2006 12:07:40 -0500 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: filldir[64] oddness |
| |
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 09:02:22AM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: > On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 04:40 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:32:04PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > > I think coverity is being trigger happy in this case :-) > > > > If that's coverity, I'm very disappointed and more than a little > > suspicious about the quality of their results. > > About half of the ~50 reports I've looked at so far in their database > have been false positives. In most of those cases, it's not obvious how > a checker might have gotten them right instead, though.
It seems to stumble quite a bit when faced with things that are free'd when refcounts drop to zero. (skbs, and kobjects).
Dave
-- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |