[SSSD] [PATCH] Unchecked return value in files.c

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Wed Feb 6 13:31:10 UTC 2013


On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:08:44PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:48:17AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > On 01/28/2013 01:16 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
> > >On 01/28/2013 10:44 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >>On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > >>>We should also test the return value of close() on the succeeding
> > >>>lines. I wonder why Coverity didn't argue here.
> > >>
> > >>My guess is that we also don't check close() return value elsewhere. The
> > >>way I've seen Coverity work is that if most other occurences are
> > >>checked, then Coverity raises a flag is one is not.
> > >
> > >Yes I though so too. That is also the reason, why I didn't check the
> > >return value of close here. If we want to check it, we must change it
> > >everywhere where close() is used (Otherwise Coverity will probably
> > >complain). Do we want to check close() return values? If so I can post
> > >another patch related to close() only that will check it everywhere, but
> > >I think it is not necessary.
> > >
> > >New patch is attached.
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >Michal
> > 
> > Ack.
> 
> Pushed to master.

Also pushed to sssd-1-9



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list