From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eastrmfepo101.cox.net ([68.230.241.213]:46944 "EHLO eastrmfepo101.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754396Ab3BFO2F (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:28:05 -0500 Received: from eastrmimpo109 ([68.230.241.222]) by eastrmfepo101.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20130206142804.GEQA20491.eastrmfepo101.cox.net@eastrmimpo109> for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:28:04 -0500 Message-ID: <5112686C.9050300@czarc.net> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:27:56 -0500 From: Gene Czarcinski MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org CC: Zach Brown , David Sterba , Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: btrfs-progs pull request for coverity fixes References: <20130206004907.GN14246@lenny.home.zabbo.net> In-Reply-To: <20130206004907.GN14246@lenny.home.zabbo.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/05/2013 07:49 PM, Zach Brown wrote: > Hi gang, > > Eric and I went through the warnings that a Coverity scan raised against > the reasonably recent btrfs-progs that's in Fedora. We tried to tackle > the lowest hanging fruit: these are the most obvious and least risky > fixes. > If you ran your tests against the btrfs-progs in Fedora 18 then your tests may not have found problems fixed by the "valgrind" patch on F18. This patch is not applied to the current David Sterba's integration branches. If you have the time, it might be useful (my opinion) to run your tests against Sterba's integration-02130201 branch ... some of the problems may be fixed and other not but you also may find some additional problems. IMO, this branch (or something similar) will be the basis for a future v0.20 btrfs-progs ... at least that is what I am using/testing with. There are over 80 commits in this branch over what is the baseis for the package in Fedora 18. Gene