23 Aug, 2014

2 commits


16 Jun, 2014

4 commits


09 Jun, 2014

3 commits


06 Jun, 2014

1 commit


14 May, 2014

9 commits


13 May, 2014

3 commits


27 Apr, 2014

1 commit


22 Apr, 2014

8 commits

  • Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193093 (#1 of 1): Structurally dead code (UNREACHABLE)
     unreachable: This code cannot be reached: "return gf_w4_double_table_i...".
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Remove identical expression, reorganize code in gf_error_check()
    to be identical handled trough all checks. Removed (raltmap && arg1 != 4)
    check - this is dead code (arg1 is always 4 in this code path).
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193071 (#1 of 1): Same on both sides (CONSTANT_EXPRESSION_RESULT)
     pointless_expression: The expression (arg1 == 4 && arg2 == 32) ||
     (arg1 == 4 && arg2 == 32) does not accomplish anything because it
     evaluates to either of its identical operands, arg1 == 4 && arg2 == 32.
     Did you intend the operands to be different?
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Swap comments/messages on GF_E_SP128_A/GF_E_SP128_S.
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Since there is no comment indicating fallthrough on purpose added a
    break in switch value 5 and 6.
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193084 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 5) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Since there is no comment indicating fallthrough on purpose added a
    break in switch value 5 and 6.
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193082 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 5) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    CID 1193083 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 6) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Since there is no comment indicating fallthrough on purpose added a
    break in switch value 3 and 5/before default.
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193080 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 3) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    CID 1193081 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 5) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Since there is no comment indicating fallthrough on purpose added a
    break in switch value 5/before default.
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193079 (#1 of 1): Missing break in switch (MISSING_BREAK)
     unterminated_case: This case (value 5) is not terminated by a 'break'
     statement.
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     
  • Instead of checking w128[0] twice check for w128[0] and w128[1].
    
    Fix for coverity issue from Ceph project:
    
    CID 1193072 (#1 of 1): Same on both sides (CONSTANT_EXPRESSION_RESULT)
     pointless_expression: The expression v1->w128[0] == v2->w128[0] &&
     v1->w128[0] == v2->w128[0] does not accomplish anything because it
     evaluates to either of its identical operands, v1->w128[0] == v2->w128[0].
     Did you intend the operands to be different?
    
    Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
    Danny Al-Gaaf
     

10 Apr, 2014

5 commits


02 Apr, 2014

3 commits


31 Mar, 2014

1 commit