Re: pinctrl: core: Handling pinmux and pinconf separately

[Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 1:26 PM Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/03/2021 11:16, Michal Simek wrote:
> > On 3/11/21 11:57 AM, Colin Ian King wrote:

> >> For the PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN and PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_GROUP
> >> setting->type cases the loop can break out with ret not being set. Since
> >> ret has not been initialized it the ret < 0 check is checking against an
> >> uninitialized value.
> >>
> >> I was not sure if the PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN and
> >> PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_GROUP cases should be setting ret and if so, what
> >> the value of ret should be set to (is it an error condition or not?). Or
> >> should ret be initialized to 0 or a default error value at the start of
> >> the function.
> >>
> >> Hence I'm reporting this issue.
> >
> > What about this? Is this passing static analysis?
>
> It will take me 2 hours to re-run the analysis, but from eyeballing the
> code I think the assignments will fix this.

It surprises me that tools in the 21st century can't run on a subset
of the data.

Had you filed a bug to the Coverity team that they will provide a way
to rerun analysis on a subset of the data?


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko