From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] power: fix argument cannot be negative Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 14:59:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1461163170-237505-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com> <1965626.9JUMUNfzfm@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "Mrzyglod, DanielX T" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Carew, Alan" To: "Mcnamara, John" Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f173.google.com (mail-io0-f173.google.com [209.85.223.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE3B9AC0 for ; Mon, 16 May 2016 14:59:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io0-f173.google.com with SMTP id i75so202869716ioa.3 for ; Mon, 16 May 2016 05:59:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-05-16 14:39 GMT+02:00 Mcnamara, John : > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon >> The next statement is probably a useless copy paste of the coverity >> report. >> >> > In send_msg: Negative value used as argument to a function expecting a >> > positive value (for example, size of buffer or allocation) > > A question on this point. Is it just that the Coverity message is useless > in this case or in general? For other error/warning fixes we include the > message in the commit. Sometimes, the coverity message is accurate, sometimes it s better to reword it. Anyway, having 2 sentences saying the same thing is disturbing.