Re: [PATCH] node_device: pacify grumpy coverity due to addr override
On 12/10/20 6:32 PM, Boris Fiuczynski wrote:
With commit 09364608b4 node_device: refactor address retrieval of
node device
"if-else if" was replaced by "switch".
The contained break statement now is no longer in context of the for loop
but instead of the switch causing the legitimate grumpiness of coverity.
Signed-off-by: Boris Fiuczynski <fiuczy(a)linux.ibm.com>
Suggested-by: John Ferlan <jferlan(a)redhat.com>
---
src/node_device/node_device_driver.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/node_device/node_device_driver.c b/src/node_device/node_device_driver.c
index e254b49244..da1bc8a545 100644
--- a/src/node_device/node_device_driver.c
+++ b/src/node_device/node_device_driver.c
@@ -637,7 +637,7 @@ nodeDeviceFindAddressByName(const char *name)
}
def = virNodeDeviceObjGetDef(dev);
- for (caps = def->caps; caps != NULL; caps = caps->next) {
+ for (caps = def->caps; caps != NULL && addr == NULL; caps =
caps->next) {
switch (caps->data.type) {
case VIR_NODE_DEV_CAP_PCI_DEV: {
virPCIDeviceAddress pci_addr = {
Yep, this is a genuine bug. Because those 'break' statements will end
the switch() and not the for() loop. But what I worry is that this
compound check is easy to overlook. So how about explicit:
if (addr)
break;
at the end of the loop, after the switch()?
Either way:
Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
Michal