[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 1/2] target/riscv: Quiet Coverity complains about vamo*
From: |
Alistair Francis |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 1/2] target/riscv: Quiet Coverity complains about vamo* |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:35 -0700 |
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 8:30 AM Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 16:19, Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 6:38 AM LIU Zhiwei <zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: LIU Zhiwei <zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
>
> Interestingly Coverity's latest scan has decided all these
> issues are 'fixed', even without the assert. I guess that the
> online version of Coverity has had an improvement to its
> checking and so is now able to figure out that it's not going
> to overrun the array? Still I think the assert is worth having.
Strange.
I'll still apply these two patches.
Alistair
>
> thanks
> -- PMM