Re: pinctrl: core: Handling pinmux and pinconf separately

[Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 12/03/2021 12:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 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?

It can. However I need to keep copies of the entire build to do this and
I build many different kernels (hence lots of storage required) and
rarely do minor change + rebuilds, so I don't cater for this in my test
build environment.

> 
>