On 6/27/19 11:33 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:26:06PM +0200, walter harms wrote: >> >> >> Am 27.06.2019 11:09, schrieb Vincenzo Frascino: >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> On 6/27/19 10:07 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:58:18AM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote: >>>>>> 119 fallback: >>>>>> 120 return clock_gettime_fallback(clock, (struct __kernel_timespec *)res); >>>>>> ^^^ >>>>>> On x86 this "res" always gets dereferenced. >>>>>> >>>>>> 121 } >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure I understand the details of this bug report. As far as I can see >>>>> "res" is never dereferenced in the vDSO library in this case, but it is passed >>>>> to the system call unchanged. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Oh yeah. Sorry. My bad. False positive. clock_gettime_fallback() >>>> doesn't necessarily dereference "res". >>>> >>> >>> No problem, better a false positive than an ignored negative :-) >>> >> >> maybe it would be clever to add a comment here indicating that this >> is intended and no problem ? >> > > No. The correct response is to fix Smatch. I will do it. > Agreed. Smatch should not report legitimate usages. > regards, > dan carpenter > -- Regards, Vincenzo
