Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2/10/2025 8:09 PM, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1642337 ("Uninitialized scalar variable")
> >>>
> >>> Is that an official kernel tag? IMO the proper tag would be
> >> So, it isn't "official" as far as I can tell, but it is widely used in
> >> other commits, especially by Gustavo Silva.
> >>
> >> Also:
> >>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=778e2478d19574508861bcb
> >> 1806d6e34d095587c
> >>
> >> Coverity-IDs: is another option I have found. I have seen Closes: a few
> >> times as well. I'm not really sure what the best option is, honestly.
> >
> > In my patch, I used and treated Addresses-Coverity-ID as a unofficial tag,
> > so additional empty line is added.
> >
> > Days ago I have received Coverity issues sent to mailing list, so I used
> > Closes tag at that time. But recently I have not seen that kind of mails.
> > Instead, I visit Coverity web site to check issues and use
> > Addresses-Coverity-ID tag, since Coverity link is not visible to everyone.
> > That is just my thought.
>
> The problem I have is that I get Coverity fixes both from the linux and the
> linux-next projects:
>
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux?tab=overview
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan?tab=overview
>
> The Coverity IDs from these projects are allocated independently, so a
> Coverity ID does not uniquely identify an issue.
>
> The URL uniquely identifies an issue, and also utilizes an official tag.
>
> That is my thought.
Yes, I have the same problem as yours. For me, I only annotate Coverity
IDs from linux project, and the linux-next project is as a reference
to check if issues are still existing in -next tree.
