Re: New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for RTEMS-Newlib

On 2025-02-11 08:07, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Confirming I should mark then as false positives.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 6:02 AM Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
>     On Feb 11 10:50, Alexey Lapshin wrote:
>      > Hi, interesting finding,
>      >
>      > Are not all these found "underflows" issues false-positive?
>      > Because all of them are under `while(!TOO_SMALL_LITTLE_BLOCK(len))` block
>      > which guarantees no underflow of "len" variable
> 
>     Yeah, looks like false positives to me, too.

Could add (size_t) to block size constant definitions?

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis              Calgary, Alberta, Canada

La perfection est atteinte                   Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter  not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retrancher  but when there is no more to cut
                                 -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry