On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 12:09:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon 11-11-19 17:35:18, coverity-bot wrote: > > This is an experimental automated report about issues detected by Coverity > > from a scan of next-20191108 as part of the linux-next weekly scan project: > > https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan > > > > You're getting this email because you were associated with the identified > > lines of code (noted below) that were touched by recent commits: > > > > c290ea01abb7 ("fs: Remove ext3 filesystem driver") > > > > Coverity reported the following: > > > > *** CID 1487847: Memory - corruptions (ARRAY_VS_SINGLETON) > > /include/linux/jbd2.h: 351 in jbd_unlock_bh_journal_head() > > 345 { > > 346 bit_spin_lock(BH_JournalHead, &bh->b_state); > > 347 } > > 348 > > 349 static inline void jbd_unlock_bh_journal_head(struct buffer_head *bh) > > 350 { > > vvv CID 1487847: Memory - corruptions (ARRAY_VS_SINGLETON) > > vvv Passing "&bh->b_state" to function "bit_spin_unlock" which uses it as an array. This might corrupt or misinterpret adjacent memory locations. > > 351 bit_spin_unlock(BH_JournalHead, &bh->b_state); > > 352 } > > This is obviously false positive. I guess coverity needs to learn about > bit-spinlocks so that it doesn't generate false positive report about each > usage? Yeah, that's a pretty weird glitch on Coverity's part. I've taken a note on this subset of warnings. Thanks for looking at it! -- Kees Cook
