On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 at 15:50, Hanna Czenczek <hre...@redhat.com> wrote: > There was and is no fix for the Coverity warning. I have mentioned that > warning because the question as to why the code uses > bdrv_check_qiov_request() came in the context of discussing it > (https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-06/msg01809.html). > > I’m not planning on fixing the Coverity warning in the code. `assert(x > <= SIZE_MAX)` to me is an absolutely reasonable piece of code, even if > always true (on some platforms), in fact, I find it a good thing if > asserted conditions are always true, not least because then the compiler > can optimize them out. I don’t think we should make it more complicated > to make Coverity happier.
Yep, I agree on that -- Coverity is bad about asserts and other conditions that are there for one particular config or host setup and only happen to be always-true on the config it scans with. The simplest thing is to mark them as false-positives. -- PMM
