[cfe-dev] Proposal: Integrate CodeChecker analyzer infrastructure

Mon Apr 25 09:29:42 PDT 2016

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
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160425/23f9ac41/attachment.html>