Coverity false positive pattern

[Gedare Bloom]

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 9:38 AM suyash singh <suyashsingh234 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes it is showing for unused values
>
> For example at line 262 in https://scan5.coverity.com/reports.htm#v53137/p10069/fileInstanceId=164938787&defectInstanceId=45953284&mergedDefectId=1399751
>
That appears to be legitimate. Analysis now has to be made whether the
value written should have been consumed somewhere, or if it is OK to
remove the assignment.

> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 9:21 PM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 9:47 AM suyash singh <suyashsingh234 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Coverity shows value_overwrite errors for variables which are reassigned new values. What should be the procedure to prevent these?
>>
>>
>> When I have seen these in the past, they indicate a case where a variable is assigned
>> and assigned later without the first value being used. Is this what you are seeing?
>>
>> What file and line?
>>
>> We sometimes assign a variable 0 when declaring it to avoid gcc warning about used
>> before initialized. It wouldn't surprise me if Scan didn't always like that.
>>
>> --joel
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel at rtems.org
>>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel