From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de>
Cc: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: Are Section mismatches out of control?
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 23:40:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080201224038.GC17828@uranus.ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802012245250.18790@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:47:25PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Feb 1 2008 03:21, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> >>
> >> Question is: why do people keep adding new ones when they are so easy to
> >> detect and fix?
> >>
> >> Asnwer: because neither they nor their patch integrators are doing adequate
> >> compilation testing.
> >
> >[...]
> >Unless they break the build, or if there currently are 0 and they make
> >it non-zero, people seem not to care....sad. Probably the same for
> >sparse/checkpatch, "there's plenty already, I can't be bothered to look"
>
> checkpatch does not parse C, it uses heuristical regexes.
>
> That makes it very different from sparse or the section mismatch
> finder which do not output false positives.
Unfortunately I most correct you. Section mismatch checks seldoms finds
what I would call 'real' bugs that causes oops - but it happen.
It is mostly fasle positives that needs workaround, but also a great
deal of missing annotation resulting in additional memory saved.
And then occasionally a bad reference in some error handling that
seldom trigger but when it does it would oops.
Sam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-01 22:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-01 10:47 Are Section mismatches out of control? Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-01 11:03 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-01 11:21 ` Harvey Harrison
2008-02-01 13:30 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-02-01 13:40 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-01 21:22 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-02-01 22:32 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-02 16:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-02-02 17:40 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-01 17:02 ` Roland Dreier
2008-02-01 21:47 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-02-01 22:10 ` James Bottomley
2008-02-01 22:40 ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2008-02-02 0:01 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-02-01 14:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-02-01 15:00 ` James Bottomley
2008-02-01 16:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-02-01 20:17 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-01 20:24 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-02-01 22:38 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-02-01 11:10 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-01 21:51 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-02-02 4:12 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-01 14:53 ` James Bottomley
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=20080201224038.GC17828@uranus.ravnborg.org \
--to=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=harvey.harrison@gmail.com \
--cc=jengelh@computergmbh.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.