pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] pcp updates - coverity changes for pmcd and pmlogger

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] pcp updates - coverity changes for pmcd and pmlogger
From: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:18:40 +1100
Cc: Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAAp5ZgN5QTMp5DvwNTdCjMO3dJKy6=R2x=K_TtE3bMOD6Ej_yQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1328314805.9716.11.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CAAp5ZgN5QTMp5DvwNTdCjMO3dJKy6=R2x=K_TtE3bMOD6Ej_yQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 17:31 +1100, Nathan Scott wrote:
> Hi Ken,
> 
> On 4 February 2012 11:20, Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > No problems with the pmcd ones ... summary is here
> > http://www.users.on.net/~kenj/pcp/coverity-pmcd.html
> >
> > For pmlogger, mostly OK, but I'd appreciate reviews for #219 and #220
> > (really the one basic issue) where I think the Coverity analysis is
> > wrong.  The summary is here
> 
> *nod* - yes, looks like namelist and instlist will not have been
> allocated taking the code path that Coverity indicates could leak
> there, due to the guard by the have_desc local.

Thanks.

> BTW, from Marks "leftovers" list I got through the ones I laid claim
> to earlier, and then pmval.  Will tackle dbpmda next I think, which
> leaves pmlogextract and pmlogrewrite for some brave soul(s)...  :)

I guess I qualify as a brave soul ... I'll take these two when I finish
pmie, and then we're done with this round ... yippee.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>