Third party analyzes Haiku’s source code

The developers of a static code analyzer have set it loose on Haiku, to help chase down errors in the code.  While the results of the analysis by Svyatoslav Razmyslov of PVS-Studio go way over my head, I’m sure they’ll be of interest to the army of volunteers who work on Haiku’s development code.

In his Introduction, Svyatoslav mentions he received an unexpected level of help from the Haiku gang in setting up his analysis, which doesn’t surprise me, given the helpful attitude among Haiku’s coders.

Results of the analysis are here.

 

Advertisements

2 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. gus knight (@waddlesplash)
    Apr 23, 2015 @ 14:02:37

    Eh. It’s sort-of-useful, but we already use Coverity which does about the same thing except it’s a lot more verbose in it’s analysis.

    Reply

  2. ttcoder
    Apr 27, 2015 @ 16:42:46

    Hey all..

    @Dane I think you meant to link “full results of analysis” to this URL?: https://5349e5fd12bfbcfdff3461eee5c809898a9c1267-www.googledrive.com/host/0B1eh-dkZ6tNpTTlHeU11M0JGdFk

    I’m not a fan of static analysis generally speaking, seeing them as cater mainly to what I call “lazy programming style” ;-)… But seeing the variety of coding styles in the Haiku code (it’s 6 million lines big after all, can’t be tight as a swiss clock), anything that can help is welcome, and I admit I was surprised to see that this PVS tool has an interesting approach.. And the results linked above are public to boot (whereas e.g. the coverity reports are behind a login wall).

    The listing would gain in efficiency if it was possible to sort by error types / hide certain types of errors for sure, to remove false positives, style-related problems (less prioritary), unconfirmed suspects (can still be significant, but should be prioritized down) and so on.

    But it seems it has also uncovered scores of dramatic errors that people were oblivious to; anybody can comment on e.g. BRoster:1209 ? If that is not a confirmed one I don’t know what is :-b Though luckily no more variables are allocated on the stack in the following 20 lines of code so no harm done there… for now. Anyway, whether that one mistake (to pull a semi random one out of the above list) was missed by Coverity, or was actually listed by Coverity but missed by devs reviewing it, now it’s listed also in this PVS listing, so that’s a plus, in a way 🙂

    Digging in the ps2 code might also uncover the “triggers” for bugs people are seeing there.

    I see some listings for the BFS code too that look interesting but it would take e.g. Axel to know if they are false positives or not.

    Anyway, past the initial excitement one has to be a realist, most of those will probably be left unfixed for a long long while, too much work for already overworked people.. That’s the nature of the times we live in, no need for me to wax philosophical about it..

    Reply

Add your comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: