From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329B6AF1 for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 17:19:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (relay4-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.196]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA59120359 for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 17:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 10:19:54 -0700 From: josh@joshtriplett.org To: Dave Jones Message-ID: <20140509171954.GC8289@cloud> References: <20140509170709.GA9747@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140509170709.GA9747@redhat.com> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] coverity, static checking etc. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 01:07:09PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > I gave a lightning talk on this last year. This year I have a bit more data > so could probably fill a whole session. > > Last year I had been doing the coverity scans on an almost daily basis > for 2-3 months. Now that we're a year in, I'd like to share some > results, and show some of the more common trends and bug patterns that > seem to pop up. > > [ spoiler: For the most part, it's all pretty positive, but we still suck ] > > It would also be good to have some more discussion about other tools > we could be making more use of. (Nomination: Dan Carpenter for smatch). I'd like to see this topic as well. I think we could do a lot better here than we do. And don't forget that GCC is one of our top static analysis tools, if only because it's the only one *everyone* runs; that includes both warnings and the possibility of shipping and building our own GCC plugin. I'd also like to nominate Christopher Li, for Sparse. - Josh Triplett