Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 14 May 2016 01:33:38 +1000 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
To:        Don Lewis <truckman@freebsd.org>
Cc:        src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,  svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r299588 - head/usr.sbin/binmiscctl
Message-ID:  <20160514013315.K1048@besplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <201605130539.u4D5dTjS009804@repo.freebsd.org>
References:  <201605130539.u4D5dTjS009804@repo.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 13 May 2016, Don Lewis wrote:

> Log:
>  Revert r299584:
>    Mark usage() as __dead2 so that Coverity doesn't think that execution
>    continues after the call and uses a negative array subscript.
>
>  Requested by:	bde

Thanks.

What was the problem that confused Coverity?

This reminds me that even compilers can see that usage() doesn't return,
by looking ahead and even inlining usage().  This breaks debugging and
profiling.  clang doesn't support the -funit-at-a-time and
-fno-inline-functions-called-once needed to reduce its excessive inlining.

Bruce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160514013315.K1048>