[cfe-dev] Analyzing DragonFly BSD
kremenek at apple.com
Fri Aug 22 10:06:38 PDT 2008
On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:07 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 2008-08-21 23:44, Ted Kremenek wrote:
>> On Aug 21, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Sascha Wildner wrote:
>>> * Interestingly, the "null dereference" count went down from 308 in
>>> http://yoyodyne.ath.cx/ccc-analyze/buildkernel/2008-08-10-1/ to
>>> 119 in
>>> http://yoyodyne.ath.cx/ccc-analyze/buildkernel/2008-08-21-2/ (we
>>> fixed a
>>> couple but not that many). Some of them were valid bugs, according
>>> one guy from our team.
>> Hi Sascha,
>> Another useful thing is if people want to provide us preprocessed
>> sources that the analyzer *correctly* identified bugs in. This would
>> allow us to incrementally add valid bug reports to our test suite.
>> This is something that we can actually add to scan-build. For every
>> source file that the analyzer flags an error, we can also
>> automatically generate preprocessed .i/.mi files. Users can then
>> submit these to us if they wish for either the case that the bug is a
>> false positive or that it's valid. Building up a test suite of
>> validated bugs would be invaluable.
> I could send you some examples where clang didn't identify a bug
> (another checkers found the bug, or it was discovered during a manual
> code review).
> Would that be useful?
Those are definitely extremely useful, and would be very much
appreciated. I want to build up a test suite of known bugs that we
both currently can find and should try to find in the future.
Preprocessed files are preferably, along with the target information
needed to reproduce the error (e.g., 32-bit versus 64-bit, etc.).
I'm also very concerned about errors that we were finding before that
we are no longer finding. Those are either regressions in the
analyzer or in clang's parser/semantic analyzer.
More information about the cfe-dev