| Message ID | 20230925194040.68592-7-vsementsov@yandex-team.ru |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | coverity fixes | expand |
On Mon, 25 Sept 2023 at 20:42, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > > set_time() function doesn't set all the fields, so it's better to > initialize tm structure. And Coverity will be happier about it. > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru> > --- > hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c b/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c > index c27c362db9..b63e1aeaea 100644 > --- a/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c > +++ b/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c > @@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ static void rtc_get_time(MC146818RtcState *s, struct tm *tm) > > static void rtc_set_time(MC146818RtcState *s) > { > - struct tm tm; > + struct tm tm = {0}; > g_autofree const char *qom_path = object_get_canonical_path(OBJECT(s)); > > rtc_get_time(s, &tm); This is probably a false positive, but initializing the struct is easier to reason about for humans too. Our "zero initialize a struct" syntax is "= {}" without the 0, though. (The version with the 0 is the standards-blessed one, but in practice some compiler versions have not been happy with it in all situations and produce spurious warnings.) thanks -- PMM
diff --git a/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c b/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c index c27c362db9..b63e1aeaea 100644 --- a/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c +++ b/hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c @@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ static void rtc_get_time(MC146818RtcState *s, struct tm *tm) static void rtc_set_time(MC146818RtcState *s) { - struct tm tm; + struct tm tm = {0}; g_autofree const char *qom_path = object_get_canonical_path(OBJECT(s)); rtc_get_time(s, &tm);
set_time() function doesn't set all the fields, so it's better to initialize tm structure. And Coverity will be happier about it. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru> --- hw/rtc/mc146818rtc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)