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 82458A83 for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 17:38:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f182.google.com (mail-ie0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B2992037C for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 17:38:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id tp5so4428829ieb.27 for ; Fri, 09 May 2014 10:38:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140509170709.GA9747@redhat.com> References: <20140509170709.GA9747@redhat.com> From: Bjorn Helgaas Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 11:37:52 -0600 Message-ID: To: Dave Jones Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 9, 2014 at 11:07 AM, 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'm interested in hearing about this, too. I've spent a fair amount of time digging through coverity scans and it's been quite useful. But it's still a hassle and there's lots of room for improvement in terms of making coverity/smatch/autobuilder/etc. results more accessible and usable. Bjorn