[cfe-dev] Proposal: Integrate CodeChecker analyzer infrastructure

Gábor Horváth via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Sep 15 08:45:45 PDT 2016


Hi!

I think one of the long term goals of the Static Analyzer is to remove the
current HTML. The recommended way to view path sensitive reports, however,
is to use an IDE or a viewer that support highlighting execution paths. It
would be strange that once the HTML output is removed the static analyzer
will not have a recommended view method inside the clang repository. I
don't know whether this is a concern, but it something that is worth to
consider.

Regards,
Gábor

On 15 September 2016 at 11:38, Orbán György via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> During the review a question was raised where should we put the
> CodeChecker source code.
> It has no strong revision lock to clang or clang-tidy.
> I would like to ask the community where should we put the source code?
> Should it go under the clang-tools-extra or kept under a separate
> repository under the LLVM umbrella or do you have any other idea?
>
> Br,
> Gyorgy
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Orbán György <o.gyorgy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The first codechecker patch including the core modules, documentation
> > and unit tests is available here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040
> > After the review is done, the second patch will contain the functional
> tests.
> > The infrastructure dependencies for testing should be discussed. Right
> > now Travis CI https://travis-ci.org/Ericsson/codechecker is triggered
> > for every commit and pull request to run the unit and functional tests
> > on Linux and OSX.
> > The third patch will contain the web UI.
> >
> > Any feedback is appreciated!
> >
> > Br,
> > Gyorgy
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Alexander Kornienko via cfe-dev
> > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> Fair enough. That makes sense to me. Thank you for the explanation! I'm
> glad
> >> the tool is being developed whether in its own repository or as a part
> of
> >> the llvm project.
> >>
> >> On Apr 25, 2016 18:22, "Anna Zaks" <ganna at apple.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 25, 2016, at 8:30 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (having dug the e-mail from the bottom of my inbox)
> >>>
> >>> I certainly like the idea of having an open-source web-based results
> >>> browser for clang-tidy and clang static analyzer results. I like the
> >>> features of CodeChecker (issue browsing, suppression, diffs). And I can
> >>> suggest more potentially useful features like:
> >>>   * code-centric browsing of the issues (with directory view showing
> >>> aggregate numbers of issues in each file/subdirectory and a file view
> >>> showing all issues in the file in a compact form - without execution
> paths);
> >>>   * an easy way to apply fixes for a subset of issues in a file /
> >>> directory.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure though, if integrating CodeChecker source code to the LLVM
> >>> project brings a lot of benefits to the CodeChecker developers and/or
> users.
> >>> I don't have any objections, I just don't understand at this point,
> what are
> >>> you expecting to achieve by moving the code to LLVM.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The benefit to the CodeChecker team is that they will gain more
> visibility
> >>> (both in terms of users and fellow developers).
> >>> The benefit to LLVM is that we could gain a much better issue viewing
> and
> >>> triaging tool than what we have now. Ex: my hope is that CodeChecker
> would
> >>> replace scan-view.
> >>>
> >>> Anna.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, György Orbán <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> We started to restructure and cleanup our source code for a better
> >>>> integration with the current lit testing environment in llvm/clang.
> >>>> After we are done we can start to merge the source in.
> >>>>
> >>>> On 03/02/2016 06:42 PM, Anna Zaks wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adding CodeChecker infrastructure would be very valuable to those who
> >>>>> use clang for bug finding. It provides a single place to view the
> bugs
> >>>>> reported by different tools such as the static analyzer and
> clang-tidy. The
> >>>>> ability to track bugs over time and cutting a baseline so that only
> the new
> >>>>> bugs are reported is important for large projects that cannot
> address all of
> >>>>> the issues at once.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let’s proceed with merging it in. Please, split commits into
> incremental
> >>>>> logical chunks.
> >>>>> (http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#incremental-development)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 23, 2016, at 2:10 AM, György Orbán via cfe-dev
> >>>>>> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We would like to add CodeChecker
> >>>>>> (https://github.com/Ericsson/codechecker) analyzer infrastructure.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is an alternative tool to scan-build with extended
> functionality.
> >>>>>> Some of the main features are: track issues over time, suppress
> false
> >>>>>> positives, detect new issues by comparing multiple analyzer run
> results,
> >>>>>> view and compare results in a web browser or in the command line. A
> >>>>>> more detailed feature list can be found below (*).
> >>>>>> The analyzer infrastructure is built in a way that integrating a new
> >>>>>> analyzer can be easily done.
> >>>>>> We are developing a tool which can be used easily by the developers
> or
> >>>>>> by automated continuous integration tools and view the results from
> multiple
> >>>>>> analyzers in a common way.
> >>>>>> We think it would serve as a good base for displaying and tracking
> bugs
> >>>>>> that can be detected by the other clang tools such as clang-tidy
> which is
> >>>>>> already supported.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For example, you can find the analysis results of the LLVM code
> 3.6.2
> >>>>>> and 3.7.1 here: http://modelserver.inf.elte.hu:5000
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Main questions to the community:
> >>>>>> 0. Does the Clang community like the idea?
> >>>>>> 1. CodeChecker has some 3rd party dependencies see below (**), are
> they
> >>>>>> acceptable?
> >>>>>> 2. Is the community satisfied with the CodeChecker name?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Unless the name is a blocker on your side, I’d like to discuss it
> later
> >>>>> once we see what the interface looks like. Frankly, I am not a fan
> of this
> >>>>> name sine it’s very ambiguous.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not think it is a blocker, we can discuss it later.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Integration plan:
> >>>>>> 0. CodeChecker should use scan-build.py (OSX support) to generate
> the
> >>>>>> compilation database instead of the current LD_PRELOAD technique
> >>>>
> >>>> Should we implement this feature (with scan-build.py intercept)
> before we
> >>>> merge our code base or after?
> >>>>
> >>>>>> 1. Migrate CodeChecker testing infrastructure to the current LLVM
> >>>>>> testing infrastructure
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (*) Most notably it extends the current tool set with the following
> >>>>>> features:
> >>>>>> - stores the result of multiple large analysis run results
> efficiently
> >>>>>> (opposed to scan-build/scan-view static htmls)
> >>>>>> - run multiple analyzers, currently Clang Static Analyzer and
> >>>>>> Clang-Tidy is supported
> >>>>>> - dynamic web based defect viewer (instead of static html)
> >>>>>> - a SQLite/PostgreSQL based defect storage & management (both are
> >>>>>> optional, results can be shown on standard output in quickcheck
> mode)
> >>>>>> - update analyzer results only for modified files (depends on the
> build
> >>>>>> system)
> >>>>>> - compare analysis results (new/resolved/unresolved bugs compared
> to a
> >>>>>> baseline)
> >>>>>> - filter analysis results (checker name, severity, source file name
> >>>>>> ...)
> >>>>>> - skip analysis in specific source directories if required
> >>>>>> - suppression of false positives (in config file or in the source)
> >>>>>> - Thrift API based server-client model for storing bugs and viewing
> >>>>>> results.
> >>>>>> - It is possible to connect multiple bug viewers. Currently a
> web-based
> >>>>>> viewer and a command line viewer are provided.
> >>>>>>    (command line client is the recommended way to connect into
> >>>>>> Continuous Integration loops)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Command line examples of usage can be found here:
> >>>>>> https://github.com/Ericsson/codechecker/blob/master/docs/usage.md
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> CodeChecker supports multiple use cases:
> >>>>>> - Small projects/several source files (quick feedback)
> >>>>>>      No database is used, analysis results are shown in on the
> command
> >>>>>> line only
> >>>>>> - Medium size projects (~500 files)
> >>>>>>      Results are stored in SQLite/PostgreSQL database and can be
> viewed
> >>>>>> from command line or web viewer clients
> >>>>>> - Large size projects (>500 files)
> >>>>>>      Results are stored in PostgreSQL database and can be viewed
> from
> >>>>>> command line or web viewer clients
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There are currently discussions about analyzer tool support in
> multiple
> >>>>>> email threads:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Idea-for-better-
> invoking-static-analysis-via-command-line-td4049670.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Proposal-
> Integrate-static-analysis-test-suites-td4048967.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> CodeChecker provides solutions for many problems discussed there:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Problem: Different analyzers provide different output formats
> (Clang
> >>>>>> Static Analyzer provides plist/html/command line, Clang-tidy
> provides
> >>>>>> command line output only)
> >>>>>>    Solution: With Codechecker analyzer results from multiple
> analyzers
> >>>>>> can be viewed in a common way for developers or other tools for
> further
> >>>>>> result processing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Problem: CC environment variable overwriting by previous
> scan-build
> >>>>>> version (written in perl) is not always a good solution.
> >>>>>>    Solution: Compilation database is generated by CodeChecker
> >>>>>> (currently using the LD_PRELOAD technique, later with scan-build.py
> for OSX
> >>>>>> support).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Problem: Analyzer has multiple command line arguments which could
> be
> >>>>>> changed by time, the end users should not be affected.
> >>>>>>    Solution: CodeChecker hides the clang analyzer specific options
> from
> >>>>>> the user. Many options are preconfigured. But forwarding options
> without
> >>>>>> modifications to the analyzers is supported.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Problem: Understanding analyzer results might be harder if only
> >>>>>> command line results are available (currently generated static html
> sites do
> >>>>>> not scale and it is hard to manage).
> >>>>>>    Solution: Analysis steps can be viewed in command line with
> >>>>>> quickcheck or in the web viewer (dynamically generated based on the
> >>>>>> database), which can help to understand the analysis results.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (**) 3rd party dependencies for various features:
> >>>>>> - Python 2.7.5 (Python Software Foundation) - required to run
> >>>>>> CodeChecker
> >>>>>> - SQLAlchemy (MIT) - Python SQL toolkit and Object Relational
> Mapper,
> >>>>>> for supporting multiple database backends
> >>>>>> - Alembic (MIT) - required for database migration support which is
> only
> >>>>>> available for PostgreSQL database
> >>>>>> - pg8000 (BSD) or psycopg2 (LGPL) - at least one database connector
> is
> >>>>>> required for PostgreSQL database support (both are supported)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We should NOT include dependencies on LGPL!
> >>>>
> >>>> This is an optional runtime dependency (it is not included), we do not
> >>>> require it, we just support it at runtime if available at the host
> machine.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> - Thrift (Apache v2.0) - cross-language service building framework
> to
> >>>>>> handle data transfer for report storage and result viewer clients
> >>>>>> - Codemirror (MIT) - view source code in the browser
> >>>>>> - Jsplumb (community edition, MIT) - draw bug paths
> >>>>>> - Marked (BSD) - view documentation for checkers written in markdown
> >>>>>> (generated dynamically)
> >>>>>> - Dojotoolkit (BSD) - main framework for the web UI
> >>>>>> - Highlightjs (BSD) - required for highlighting the source code
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For further information check out our GitHub
> >>>>>> (https://github.com/Ericsson/codechecker) page.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>> Gyorgy Orban
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
> >>>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >>>>
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> Gyorgy Orban
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> cfe-dev mailing list
> >>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cfe-dev mailing list
> >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160915/a2a710c2/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list