Coverity model should know that KM_NOSLEEP means no sleeping
This fixes an old oversight. I doubt it affected the accuracy of coverity very much, but it is an improvement that I caught while discussing the latest coverity results with Rob N. Signed-off-by: Richard Yao <richard.yao@alumni.stonybrook.edu>
This commit is contained in:
parent
20c8bdd85e
commit
a0d81220e3
|
@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ spl_kmem_alloc(size_t sz, int fl, const char *func, int line)
|
|||
|
||||
__coverity_negative_sink__(sz);
|
||||
|
||||
if (condition1)
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) && condition1)
|
||||
__coverity_sleep__();
|
||||
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) || condition0) {
|
||||
|
@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ spl_kmem_zalloc(size_t sz, int fl, const char *func, int line)
|
|||
|
||||
__coverity_negative_sink__(sz);
|
||||
|
||||
if (condition1)
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) && condition1)
|
||||
__coverity_sleep__();
|
||||
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) || condition0) {
|
||||
|
@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ spl_vmem_alloc(size_t sz, int fl, const char *func, int line)
|
|||
|
||||
__coverity_negative_sink__(sz);
|
||||
|
||||
if (condition1)
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) && condition1)
|
||||
__coverity_sleep__();
|
||||
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) || condition0) {
|
||||
|
@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ spl_vmem_zalloc(size_t sz, int fl, const char *func, int line)
|
|||
(void) func;
|
||||
(void) line;
|
||||
|
||||
if (condition1)
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) && condition1)
|
||||
__coverity_sleep__();
|
||||
|
||||
if (((fl & KM_NOSLEEP) != KM_NOSLEEP) || condition0) {
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue