On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 09:10:02PM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:47 PM Mcnamara, John > wrote: > > > > From: David Marchand [mailto:david.marchand@redhat.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 12:48 PM > > > To: Yigit, Ferruh ; Mcnamara, John < > > john.mcnamara@intel.com> > > > Cc: dpdk-dev ; Stokes, Ian ; Thomas > > Monjalon ; Jerin Jacob < > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>; Akhil, Goyal ; > > Dumitrescu, Cristian ; Xu, Qian Q < > > qian.q.xu@intel.com>; Yongseok Koh ; Maxime Coquelin < > > maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>; Zhang, Qi Z ; Shahaf > > Shuler ; De Lara Guarch, Pablo < > > pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 28/3/2019 > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 1:04 PM Ferruh Yigit > > wrote: > > > Coverity > > > -------- > > > > > > * Coverity is back on, John run a new scan with latest code: > > > https://scan.coverity.com/projects/dpdk-data-plane-development-kit > > > > > > The "components" mappings seem quite old/invalid to me: > > > - we still have the old pmds path à la lib/librte_pmd_XXX > > > - pmd_bond points to an drivers/net/bond/. > > > - pmd_mlx4 points to drivers/net/ixgbe/. > > > > > > And others catches almost everything (400k loc). > > > > > > John, can you fix it? > > > > Yes. Let me know the mappings/changes you want to make and I can implement > > them or we can make you and admin and you can do it. > > > > I don't particularly care. I could do it, but this would be best effort > anyway. > The question is more: do we want to use coverity on the mid-, long-term ? > I think it's worth continuing to use. It's been useful over the years we've been using it thus far. /Bruce