8041 2015-07-22 18:35:23 +0000 dosfstools patches introduce coverity issues not there in upstream 2015-11-11 17:46:12 +0000 1 1 5 Infrastructure AutoBuilder autobuilder unspecified x86 Multiple RESOLVED NOTABUG Undecided normal --- 1 terri.oda elizabeth.flanagan elizabeth.flanagan infras.ab.watcher Infras.watcher --- New (Never tested) No (bug/feature does not impact docs) oldest_to_newest 52531 0 terri.oda 2015-07-22 18:35:23 +0000 Scott Garman's patches to dosfstools are introducing code that static analysis has flagged as potential issues. It's all related to mkdosfs.c: line 1445: CID 294095 (#2 of 2): Buffer not null terminated (BUFFER_SIZE) 3. buffer_size: Calling strncpy with a source string whose length (11 chars) is greater than or equal to the size argument (11) will fail to null-terminate dos_name. 1572: CID 294100 (#2 of 2): Missing return statement (MISSING_RETURN) 5. missing_return: Arriving at the end of a function without returning a value. 1632: CID 294097 (#1 of 1): Buffer not null terminated (BUFFER_SIZE_WARNING) 16. buffer_size_warning: Calling strncpy with a maximum size argument of 11 bytes on destination array entry->name of size 11 bytes might leave the destination string unterminated. 1697: CID 294102 (#1 of 1): Resource leak (RESOURCE_LEAK)29. leaked_storage: Variable buffer going out of scope leaks the storage it points to. 1783: CID 294096 (#1 of 1): Buffer not null terminated (BUFFER_SIZE_WARNING) 11. buffer_size_warning: Calling strncpy with a maximum size argument of 11 bytes on destination array entry->name of size 11 bytes might leave the destination string unterminated. Here's the coverity link for more detail: https://cov.jf.intel.com/reports.htm#v14248/p10089 These may well be false positives, but since my email to Scott's Intel address bounced, I'm not sure who to ask to look at these. Guidance appreciated! 56393 1 elizabeth.flanagan 2015-11-11 17:46:12 +0000 Removing from Bugzilla.