Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Coverity report for ltp-20130109

LTP Jan Stancek 2 participants 5 messages Mar 19, 2013 2 messages not in the archive

lore
Share & tools
lore

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]

#1 lore raw

Hi,

What is Coverity?
Coverity Prevent is commercial enterprise level tool for static analysis (analysis based only on compiling of sources, not based on running of binary) of the C/C++ and Java code.

analyzer coverity
analyzer-args --wait-for-license -co BAD_FREE:allow_first_field:true --all analyzer-version Coverity Static Analysis for C/C++ version 6.5.1 on Linux 2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64 x86_64

I ran it for current LTP stable (20130109) (on top of RHEL6.4) and I'm sharing results here:
http://jan.stancek.eu/coverity/ltp-20130109-1.el6.err.xz

I looked at results only very briefly so far. The one that caught my eye was actually my previous email: inode02: fix "slash" array overrun. This run includes "--all" parameter, so it's likely there are some false positives.

Regards,
Jan

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

#2 lore raw

Hi!

Quoted 9 lines

What is Coverity?
Coverity Prevent is commercial enterprise level tool for static analysis (analysis based only on compiling of sources, not based on running of binary) of the C/C++ and Java code.

analyzer coverity
analyzer-args --wait-for-license -co BAD_FREE:allow_first_field:true --all analyzer-version Coverity Static Analysis for C/C++ version 6.5.1 on Linux 2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64 x86_64

Quoted 8 lines

I ran it for current LTP stable (20130109) (on top of RHEL6.4) and I'm sharing results here:
http://jan.stancek.eu/coverity/ltp-20130109-1.el6.err.xz

I looked at results only very briefly so far. The one that caught my eye was actually my previous email: inode02: fix "slash" array overrun. This run includes "--all" parameter, so it's likely there are some false positives.

Nice. I will have a look at the data too.

Signature · 12 lines
Cyril Hrubis
[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
#3 lore raw

Hi!

Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 13 lines

What is Coverity?
Coverity Prevent is commercial enterprise level tool for static analysis (analysis based only on compiling of sources, not based on running of binary) of the C/C++ and Java code.

analyzer coverity
analyzer-args --wait-for-license -co BAD_FREE:allow_first_field:true --all analyzer-version Coverity Static Analysis for C/C++ version 6.5.1 on Linux 2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64 x86_64

I ran it for current LTP stable (20130109) (on top of RHEL6.4) and I'm sharing results here:
http://jan.stancek.eu/coverity/ltp-20130109-1.el6.err.xz

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines

I looked at results only very briefly so far. The one that caught my eye was actually my previous email: inode02: fix "slash" array overrun. This run includes "--all" parameter, so it's likely there are some false positives.

Nice. I will have a look at the data too.

Here are some statistical data:

The total number of tests mentioned in the report is 747, 600 is from the testcases/kernel/ directory along with some in network, misc. There seems to be quite a number of reports in the lib/ directory.

Could you run the tool for the openposix testcases as well?

Signature · 12 lines
Cyril Hrubis
[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]

#5 lore raw

Hi!

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line

Nice. I will have a look at the data too.

Here are some statistical data:

The total number of tests mentioned in the report is 747, 600 is from the
testcases/kernel/ directory along with some in network, misc. There seems to be quite a number of reports in the lib/ directory.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line

Could you run the tool for the openposix testcases as well?

I forgot that those are not compiled along with everything else. Yes, I can do that, I'll adjust my setup and give a try.

I noticed you are making changes in this area, would it make more sense to run it on latest rather than latest LTP stable?

Most of the fixes I've did was to remove stubs, but there vere some real fixes (but most likely single digit number). The same applies to the rest of the testcases.

So if running it in latest git is simple enough, please do so, otherwise stick with the latest release.

Signature · 12 lines
Cyril Hrubis
[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
#6 lore raw
In reply to Jan Stancek

Hi!

Quoted 3 lines

I ran it for current LTP stable (20130109) (on top of RHEL6.4) and I'm sharing results here:
http://jan.stancek.eu/coverity/ltp-20130109-1.el6.err.xz

I've looked at the results briefly and allready found and fixed one (quite stupid) bug in doio.c.

But there seems to be quite a number of false possitives because LTP does things that are usually wrong intentionally (i.e. NULL dereference). We could probably mask most of the cases from the compiler by setting such variables as volatile, but I'm not really sure if it's worth of it.

Signature · 12 lines
Cyril Hrubis
[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list