From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752352AbcLJUYp (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 15:24:45 -0500 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:45300 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751985AbcLJUYo (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 15:24:44 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:24:11 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Julia Lawall Cc: Joe Perches , James Smart , Keith Busch , Jens Axboe , linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] nvme-fabrics: correct some printk information Message-ID: <20161210202411.GZ8176@mwanda> References: <20161210090618.GA11680@elgon.mountain> <1481369270.5946.51.camel@perches.com> <20161210184029.GY8176@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org For my check, most of the results fall into three categories. 1) False positives (40% of results) 2) Badly designed interfaces that take a pointer to a pointer for no reason and can be cleaned up. (5%) 3) Bugs where we modified the code, but haven't tested it. Most of the time passing the wrong pointer will be detected right away during testing so it's not like this is a super common type of bug. (55%) I haven't pushed the check because 40% false positives is probably enough to make people complain. regards, dan carpenter