> Thank you for the report!
>
>> Coverity is not very happy with this patch.
>> It's complaining that the result of window_gettupleslot
>> is not checked, which seems valid:
>>
>> 1503 {
>> 1504 if (fetch_tuple)
>>>>> CID 1666587: Error handling issues (CHECKED_RETURN)
>>>>> Calling "window_gettupleslot" without checking return value (as is done elsewhere 8 out of 9 times).
>> 1505 window_gettupleslot(winobj, pos, slot);
>> 1506 if (!are_peers(winstate, slot, winstate->ss.ss_ScanTupleSlot))
>> 1507 return -1;
>
> Yes, I forgot to check the return value of window_gettupleslot.
>
>> and also that WinGetFuncArgInPartition is dereferencing
>> a possibly-null "isout" pointer at several places, including
>>
>>>>> Dereferencing null pointer "isout".
>> 3806 if (*isout) /* out of partition? */
>>
>>>>> Dereferencing null pointer "isout".
>> 3817 if (!*isout && set_mark)
>> 3818 WinSetMarkPosition(winobj, abs_pos);
>>
>>>>> Dereferencing null pointer "isout".
>> 3817 if (!*isout && set_mark)
>> 3818 WinSetMarkPosition(winobj, abs_pos);
>>
>> The latter complaints seem to be because some places in
>> WinGetFuncArgInPartition check for nullness of that pointer
>> and some do not. That looks like at least a latent bug
>> to me.
>
> Agreed.
>
> Attached is a patch to fix the issue.
Please disregard the v1 patch. It includes a bug: If
WinGetFuncArgInPartition() is called with set_mark == true and isout
== NULL, WinSetMarkPosition() is not called by
WinGetFuncArgInPartition().
I will post v2 patch.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS K.K.
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
