Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200207152109.20855-1-steved@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200207152109.20855-1-steved@redhat.com>
From:   Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@umich.edu>
Date:   Fri, 7 Feb 2020 12:25:23 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN-5tyHatMk_xsBW5MHpv7-HyiCMPS9qrz3_O6-XN5KpH_RWtA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] query_krb5_ccache: Removed dead code that was flagged by
 a covscan
To:     Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux NFS Mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 10:22 AM Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>
> ---
>  utils/gssd/krb5_util.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/utils/gssd/krb5_util.c b/utils/gssd/krb5_util.c
> index bff759f..a1c43d2 100644
> --- a/utils/gssd/krb5_util.c
> +++ b/utils/gssd/krb5_util.c
> @@ -1066,8 +1066,6 @@ query_krb5_ccache(const char* cred_cache, char **ret_princname,
>                             *ret_realm = strdup(str+1);
>                     }
>                     k5_free_unparsed_name(context, princstring);
> -               } else {
> -                       found = 0;
>                 }

Uhm, sorry wasn't fast enough for you commit decision but I don't see
that this a dead code? krb5_unparse_string() could return an error so
"else" is a valid condition. I mean it's probably unlikely that
check_for_tgt() returns found and they you can't parse the principal
name out of it. But things like memory errors could still be valid
error conditions?


>         }
>         krb5_free_principal(context, principal);
> --
> 2.24.1
>