> So, what does this mean? That coverity is broken, yet again?
right, it means that this was a false report.
> I'm getting very tired of these false positives from them, it is getting
> so that I can't trust the output of the tool at all :(
you shouldnt trust it anyways. At the moment ~11% of the
stuff we checked is marked as bug, ~24% as false or ignore,
5% pending, 4% resolved and 54% uninspected. If we count
pending and resolved to the bugs, that would mean a 50/50
split between bugs and false positives. So we should not trust
it blind and i try my best to avoid such mistakes.
But I wouldnt say coverity is that bad, and it already helped
us fixing several bugs.
Greetings, Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
