On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 19:14, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
On 21.01.21 12:36, Sughosh Ganu wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 00:34, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com mailto:trini@konsulko.com> wrote:
I decided to run Coverity part-way through the merge window this time and here's what's been found so far. ----- Forwarded message from scan-admin@coverity.com <mailto:scan-admin@coverity.com> ----- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 17:53:19 +0000 (UTC) From: scan-admin@coverity.com <mailto:scan-admin@coverity.com> To: tom.rini@gmail.com <mailto:tom.rini@gmail.com> Subject: New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for Das U-Boot Hi, Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to Das U-Boot found with Coverity Scan. 23 new defect(s) introduced to Das U-Boot found with Coverity Scan. 2 defect(s), reported by Coverity Scan earlier, were marked fixed in the recent build analyzed by Coverity Scan. New defect(s) Reported-by: Coverity Scan Showing 20 of 23 defect(s) ** CID 316356: Resource leaks (RESOURCE_LEAK) /tools/mkeficapsule.c: 225 in add_public_key()<snip>
*** CID 316356: Resource leaks (RESOURCE_LEAK) /tools/mkeficapsule.c: 225 in add_public_key() 219 if (ret < 0) { 220 fprintf(stderr, "%s: Unable to add public key to the FDT\n", 221 __func__); 222 goto err; 223 } 224 >>> CID 316356: Resource leaks (RESOURCE_LEAK) >>> Handle variable "srcfd" going out of scope leaks the handle. 225 return 0; 226 227 err: 228 if (sptr) 229 munmap(sptr, src_size); 230I think these should not cause any issues, since the function return results in the process termination in both the scenarios of success and failure. But i will post a patch to handle these errors to keep the resource handling consistent.
Looking at line 234f:
if (srcfd >= 0) close(srcfd);The comparison is wrong. It should be:
if (srcfd != -1) close(srcfd);The open.2 man-page says that only -1 signals an error. According to the man-page -2 is a legal value for a file descriptor.
Can you point me to which man page you are referring to. The open manpage on my ubuntu system has the following,
"The return value of open() is a file descriptor, a small, nonnegative integer that is used in subsequent system calls"
I could not find any mention of -2 being a valid file descriptor.
-sughosh