From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dan.carpenter@oracle.com (Dan Carpenter) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 22:16:49 +0300 Subject: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ARM ATTEND] catching up on exploit mitigations In-Reply-To: <20130801190556.GA1495@redhat.com> References: <20130801091322.GA5302@mwanda> <20130801190556.GA1495@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20130801191649.GB5102@mwanda> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 03:05:56PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 12:13:22PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > I was just reading http://faultlinux.lip6.fr/ which says that in > > 2011 the static checker fault rate in arch/ and fs/ was worse than > > in drivers/ > > I've been working on getting more regular builds in coverity, so we can > get more meaningful statistics on things like "what area is getting worse". > > Of the current bugs I've categorised so far, here's the breakdown for 3.11-rc3 > in terms of highest bug counts. > > Drivers/net/wireless: 659 > Drivers/ [1] : 600 > Drivers/staging: 449 > Drivers/scsi: 409 > Drivers/net: 350 > Net/[2] : 297 > Drivers/media: 286 > Sound: 220 > Drivers/GPU: 217 > > That's the top categories for the whole kernel. > > That wireless was top of the list was the least shocking thing to me, > based on what we get reported to Fedora bugzilla. That it found more > bugs there than in staging was amusing though. The good news is that > wireless also takes the top slot for 'resolved' issues. > > The paper above talks about 'arch' but doesn't indicate if it's counting > all arches, or just the one they run the tests on. (Coverity only covers x86, > so arch/ shows up in 10th place there). It's Coccinelle, so my guess is they ran it on all the .c files. regards, dan carpenter