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

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Tue Jan 29 15:08:44 UTC 2013


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.



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list