From: "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:12:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B27915DBBA3421428155699D51E4CFE2023BAF1C@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151112140508.79489210@xeon-e3>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 10:05 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
>
> Looking at the Coverity scan for DPDK, it looks like all the base drivers
> are marked to be ignored.
>
> Although the changes to base drivers should not be done directly through
> DPDK list. I think it is still valuable to have these driver scanned and
> notify (badger) the vendors to fix there code.
>
> Since lots of the bugs could be there, just blindly ignoring warnings and
> issues is being naive.
Hi Stephen,
I set up the Coverity rules. I added the ignore rules for the base drivers on the assumption that the DPDK community wasn't, in most cases, going to be able to fix issues that occurred in them. However, as you say, it is best to know about potential bugs even if there isn't a direct route to fix them.
If we are going to turn on analysis of the base drivers then maybe we can wait until after we have a baseline for DPDK 2.3 since I presume there will be a flood of issues and I don't want the new issues in this release (that we can fix more readily) to get lost.
The base drivers aside, we have 114 open issues that should be fixed, or marked as investigated and safe to ignore. Also, the analysis is currently run with only the default DPDK config options. I'll extend the analysis to run as many of the non-default config items as possible.
If people haven't already done so I would urge them to sign up and view/fix the defects.
https://scan.coverity.com/users/sign_up
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/4005 (DPDK)
Apply as "Contributor/Member" if you plan to review/close issues or as "Defect Viewer" if you just wish to see the issues.
I've recently set up a script to identify the likely author of new Coverity defects based on git blame, and to email them the defect report. It isn't 100% accurate, in particular for whitespace changes around existing defects, but it is a start.
John.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-13 0:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-12 22:05 Stephen Hemminger
2015-11-12 22:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-11-13 0:16 ` Mcnamara, John
2015-11-12 22:55 ` Matthew Hall
2015-11-13 0:12 ` Mcnamara, John [this message]
2015-11-13 18:49 ` Matthew Hall
2015-11-13 19:21 ` Mcnamara, John
2015-11-13 19:23 ` Matthew Hall
2015-11-13 19:38 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-11-13 20:20 ` Matthew Hall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=B27915DBBA3421428155699D51E4CFE2023BAF1C@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=shemming@brocade.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).