New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for freerangerouting/frr
scan-admin at coverity.com
scan-admin at coverity.com
Thu Feb 13 08:54:17 EST 2020
Hi,
Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to freerangerouting/frr found with Coverity Scan.
84 new defect(s) introduced to freerangerouting/frr found with Coverity Scan.
28 defect(s), reported by Coverity Scan earlier, were marked fixed in the recent build analyzed by Coverity Scan.
New defect(s) Reported-by: Coverity Scan
Showing 20 of 84 defect(s)
** CID 1491246: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1672 in frr::GetRequest::GetRequest()()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491246: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1672 in frr::GetRequest::GetRequest()()
1666 GetRequest::GetRequest()
1667 : ::google::protobuf::Message(), _internal_metadata_(NULL) {
1668 ::google::protobuf::internal::InitSCC(
1669 &protobuf_grpc_2ffrr_2dnorthbound_2eproto::scc_info_GetRequest.base);
1670 SharedCtor();
1671 // @@protoc_insertion_point(constructor:frr.GetRequest)
>>> CID 1491246: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
>>> Non-static class member "encoding_" is not initialized in this constructor nor in any functions that it calls.
1672 }
1673 GetRequest::GetRequest(const GetRequest& from)
1674 : ::google::protobuf::Message(),
1675 _internal_metadata_(NULL),
1676 path_(from.path_) {
1677 _internal_metadata_.MergeFrom(from._internal_metadata_);
** CID 1491245: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 5086 in frr::ListTransactionsRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491245: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 5086 in frr::ListTransactionsRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
5080 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
5081 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
5082 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.ListTransactionsRequest)
5083 for (;;) {
5084 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
5085 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491245: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
5086 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
5087 handle_unusual:
5088 if (tag == 0) {
5089 goto success;
5090 }
5091 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491244: Null pointer dereferences (NULL_RETURNS)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491244: Null pointer dereferences (NULL_RETURNS)
/bgpd/bgp_nht.c: 903 in bgp_nht_register_enhe_capability_interfaces()
897 if (peer != bnc->nht_info)
898 return;
899
900 for (nhop = bnc->nexthop; nhop; nhop = nhop->next) {
901 ifp = if_lookup_by_index(nhop->ifindex,
902 nhop->vrf_id);
>>> CID 1491244: Null pointer dereferences (NULL_RETURNS)
>>> Dereferencing a pointer that might be "NULL" "ifp" when calling "zclient_send_interface_radv_req".
903 zclient_send_interface_radv_req(zclient,
904 nhop->vrf_id,
905 ifp, true,
906 BGP_UNNUM_DEFAULT_RA_INTERVAL);
907 }
** CID 1491243: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1136 in frr::GetCapabilitiesRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491243: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1136 in frr::GetCapabilitiesRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
1130 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
1131 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
1132 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.GetCapabilitiesRequest)
1133 for (;;) {
1134 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
1135 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491243: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
1136 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
1137 handle_unusual:
1138 if (tag == 0) {
1139 goto success;
1140 }
1141 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491242: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1282 in frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse(const frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse&)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491242: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1282 in frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse(const frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse&)()
1276 frr_version_.UnsafeSetDefault(&::google::protobuf::internal::GetEmptyStringAlreadyInited());
1277 if (from.frr_version().size() > 0) {
1278 frr_version_.AssignWithDefault(&::google::protobuf::internal::GetEmptyStringAlreadyInited(), from.frr_version_);
1279 }
1280 rollback_support_ = from.rollback_support_;
1281 // @@protoc_insertion_point(copy_constructor:frr.GetCapabilitiesResponse)
>>> CID 1491242: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
>>> Non-static class member "_supported_encodings_cached_byte_size_" is not initialized in this constructor nor in any functions that it calls.
1282 }
1283
1284 void GetCapabilitiesResponse::SharedCtor() {
1285 frr_version_.UnsafeSetDefault(&::google::protobuf::internal::GetEmptyStringAlreadyInited());
1286 rollback_support_ = false;
1287 }
** CID 1491241: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6376 in frr::LockConfigResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491241: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6376 in frr::LockConfigResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
6370 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
6371 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
6372 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.LockConfigResponse)
6373 for (;;) {
6374 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
6375 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491241: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
6376 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
6377 handle_unusual:
6378 if (tag == 0) {
6379 goto success;
6380 }
6381 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491240: Memory - illegal accesses (USE_AFTER_FREE)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491240: Memory - illegal accesses (USE_AFTER_FREE)
/lib/routemap.c: 930 in route_map_index_delete()
924 if (rmap_debug)
925 zlog_debug("Deleting route-map %s sequence %d",
926 index->map->name, index->pref);
927
928 /* Free route map northbound hook contexts. */
929 while (!TAILQ_EMPTY(&index->rhclist))
>>> CID 1491240: Memory - illegal accesses (USE_AFTER_FREE)
>>> Calling "routemap_hook_context_free" dereferences freed pointer "index->rhclist.tqh_first".
930 routemap_hook_context_free(TAILQ_FIRST(&index->rhclist));
931
932 /* Free route match. */
933 while ((rule = index->match_list.head) != NULL)
934 route_map_rule_delete(&index->match_list, rule);
935
** CID 1491239: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 3864 in frr::EditCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491239: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 3864 in frr::EditCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
3858 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
3859 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
3860 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.EditCandidateResponse)
3861 for (;;) {
3862 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
3863 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491239: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
3864 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
3865 handle_unusual:
3866 if (tag == 0) {
3867 goto success;
3868 }
3869 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491238: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6734 in frr::UnlockConfigResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491238: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6734 in frr::UnlockConfigResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
6728 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
6729 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
6730 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.UnlockConfigResponse)
6731 for (;;) {
6732 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
6733 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491238: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
6734 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
6735 handle_unusual:
6736 if (tag == 0) {
6737 goto success;
6738 }
6739 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491237: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 3372 in frr::UpdateCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491237: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 3372 in frr::UpdateCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
3366 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
3367 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
3368 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.UpdateCandidateResponse)
3369 for (;;) {
3370 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
3371 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491237: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
3372 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
3373 handle_unusual:
3374 if (tag == 0) {
3375 goto success;
3376 }
3377 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491236: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6555 in frr::UnlockConfigRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491236: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6555 in frr::UnlockConfigRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
6549 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
6550 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
6551 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.UnlockConfigRequest)
6552 for (;;) {
6553 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
6554 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491236: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
6555 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
6556 handle_unusual:
6557 if (tag == 0) {
6558 goto success;
6559 }
6560 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491235: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 2345 in frr::CreateCandidateRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491235: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 2345 in frr::CreateCandidateRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
2339 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
2340 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
2341 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.CreateCandidateRequest)
2342 for (;;) {
2343 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
2344 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491235: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
2345 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
2346 handle_unusual:
2347 if (tag == 0) {
2348 goto success;
2349 }
2350 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491234: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6197 in frr::LockConfigRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491234: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 6197 in frr::LockConfigRequest::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
6191 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
6192 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
6193 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.LockConfigRequest)
6194 for (;;) {
6195 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
6196 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491234: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
6197 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
6198 handle_unusual:
6199 if (tag == 0) {
6200 goto success;
6201 }
6202 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491233: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
/bgpd/bgp_rpki.c: 1423 in match_rpki()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491233: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
/bgpd/bgp_rpki.c: 1423 in match_rpki()
1417 case RMAP_RULE_MISSING:
1418 vty_out(vty, "%% BGP Can't find rule.\n");
1419 return CMD_WARNING_CONFIG_FAILED;
1420 case RMAP_COMPILE_ERROR:
1421 vty_out(vty, "%% BGP Argument is malformed.\n");
1422 return CMD_WARNING_CONFIG_FAILED;
>>> CID 1491233: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
>>> Execution cannot reach this statement: "case RMAP_COMPILE_SUCCESS:".
1423 case RMAP_COMPILE_SUCCESS:
1424 /*
1425 * Intentionally doing nothing here
1426 */
1427 break;
1428 }
** CID 1491232: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 2970 in frr::DeleteCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491232: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 2970 in frr::DeleteCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
2964 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
2965 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
2966 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.DeleteCandidateResponse)
2967 for (;;) {
2968 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
2969 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491232: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
2970 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
2971 handle_unusual:
2972 if (tag == 0) {
2973 goto success;
2974 }
2975 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491231: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1269 in frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse()()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491231: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1269 in frr::GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse()()
1263 GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse()
1264 : ::google::protobuf::Message(), _internal_metadata_(NULL) {
1265 ::google::protobuf::internal::InitSCC(
1266 &protobuf_grpc_2ffrr_2dnorthbound_2eproto::scc_info_GetCapabilitiesResponse.base);
1267 SharedCtor();
1268 // @@protoc_insertion_point(constructor:frr.GetCapabilitiesResponse)
>>> CID 1491231: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
>>> Non-static class member "_supported_encodings_cached_byte_size_" is not initialized in this constructor nor in any functions that it calls.
1269 }
1270 GetCapabilitiesResponse::GetCapabilitiesResponse(const GetCapabilitiesResponse& from)
1271 : ::google::protobuf::Message(),
1272 _internal_metadata_(NULL),
1273 supported_modules_(from.supported_modules_),
1274 supported_encodings_(from.supported_encodings_) {
** CID 1491230: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
/bgpd/bgp_rpki.c: 1456 in no_match_rpki()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491230: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
/bgpd/bgp_rpki.c: 1456 in no_match_rpki()
1450 case RMAP_RULE_MISSING:
1451 vty_out(vty, "%% BGP Can't find rule.\n");
1452 break;
1453 case RMAP_COMPILE_ERROR:
1454 vty_out(vty, "%% BGP Argument is malformed.\n");
1455 break;
>>> CID 1491230: Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
>>> Execution cannot reach this statement: "case RMAP_COMPILE_SUCCESS:".
1456 case RMAP_COMPILE_SUCCESS:
1457 /*
1458 * Nothing to do here
1459 */
1460 break;
1461 }
** CID 1491229: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 5624 in frr::GetTransactionRequest::GetTransactionRequest(const frr::GetTransactionRequest&)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491229: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 5624 in frr::GetTransactionRequest::GetTransactionRequest(const frr::GetTransactionRequest&)()
5618 _internal_metadata_(NULL) {
5619 _internal_metadata_.MergeFrom(from._internal_metadata_);
5620 ::memcpy(&transaction_id_, &from.transaction_id_,
5621 static_cast<size_t>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&with_defaults_) -
5622 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&transaction_id_)) + sizeof(with_defaults_));
5623 // @@protoc_insertion_point(copy_constructor:frr.GetTransactionRequest)
>>> CID 1491229: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
>>> Non-static class member "with_defaults_" is not initialized in this constructor nor in any functions that it calls.
5624 }
5625
5626 void GetTransactionRequest::SharedCtor() {
5627 ::memset(&transaction_id_, 0, static_cast<size_t>(
5628 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&with_defaults_) -
5629 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&transaction_id_)) + sizeof(with_defaults_));
** CID 1491228: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 4359 in frr::LoadToCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491228: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 4359 in frr::LoadToCandidateResponse::MergePartialFromCodedStream(google::protobuf::io::CodedInputStream *)()
4353 #define DO_(EXPRESSION) if (!GOOGLE_PREDICT_TRUE(EXPRESSION)) goto failure
4354 ::google::protobuf::uint32 tag;
4355 // @@protoc_insertion_point(parse_start:frr.LoadToCandidateResponse)
4356 for (;;) {
4357 ::std::pair<::google::protobuf::uint32, bool> p = input->ReadTagWithCutoffNoLastTag(127u);
4358 tag = p.first;
>>> CID 1491228: Incorrect expression (IDENTICAL_BRANCHES)
>>> The same code is executed when the condition "!p.second" is true or false, because the code in the if-then branch and after the if statement is identical. Should the if statement be removed?
4359 if (!p.second) goto handle_unusual;
4360 handle_unusual:
4361 if (tag == 0) {
4362 goto success;
4363 }
4364 DO_(::google::protobuf::internal::WireFormat::SkipField(
** CID 1491227: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1682 in frr::GetRequest::GetRequest(const frr::GetRequest&)()
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*** CID 1491227: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
/grpc/frr-northbound.pb.cc: 1682 in frr::GetRequest::GetRequest(const frr::GetRequest&)()
1676 path_(from.path_) {
1677 _internal_metadata_.MergeFrom(from._internal_metadata_);
1678 ::memcpy(&type_, &from.type_,
1679 static_cast<size_t>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&with_defaults_) -
1680 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&type_)) + sizeof(with_defaults_));
1681 // @@protoc_insertion_point(copy_constructor:frr.GetRequest)
>>> CID 1491227: Uninitialized members (UNINIT_CTOR)
>>> Non-static class member "with_defaults_" is not initialized in this constructor nor in any functions that it calls.
1682 }
1683
1684 void GetRequest::SharedCtor() {
1685 ::memset(&type_, 0, static_cast<size_t>(
1686 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&with_defaults_) -
1687 reinterpret_cast<char*>(&type_)) + sizeof(with_defaults_));
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
To view the defects in Coverity Scan visit, https://u2389337.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=nJaKvJSIH-2FPAfmty-2BK5tYpPklAc1eEA-2F1zfUjH6teEwtXAn74UdOrNjckt5W0LJ0CDxXoQFnSJSV51LhpQIExOPuUyDQ-2BIaYqt88E1d5-2F-2Fc-3DuQfE_O0IDF7c8sUs2B6kWTeWwAJZqriD5fgsfL8PAN30oQTyN4edE6wiQqVoeStLyde0U14v4GcAMO8rBE0pA0qcGfBG1u-2FjVSVTl4MBQvB4YQo8gEQg5TILfborYWwnUPr4TltJ3DqBRK8lyeSGYiUD1jcxefrFKtk69vfrOMW98luib3Ah8dPqjRH9vnyZWkvh9Qr0neBH7-2BoBz8hitVV9GNwFZ4P56hDNFSrNB87WsSsQ-3D
More information about the dev
mailing list