From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUxH1-0006Wj-A5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:04:11 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUxGw-0006V0-3T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:04:10 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47463 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUxGv-0006Ux-PK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:04:05 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:6805)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1NUxGv-0000yh-2D
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:04:05 -0500
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:32:54 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Static analysis using clang on the x86_64 target
Message-ID: <20100113070254.GD31063@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <20100112181307.GD19438@amit-x200.redhat.com>
	<f43fc5581001121135x790c1fb1yf3ba5883ac6bd8c3@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f43fc5581001121135x790c1fb1yf3ba5883ac6bd8c3@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On (Tue) Jan 12 2010 [19:35:08], Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Here's a run of the clang analyzer on qemu sources for the x86_64
> > target.
> >
> > See
> >
> > http://amitshah.fedorapeople.org/clang-output/2010-01-12-9/
> >
> > for the results.
> >
> > There are a few results there which look dubious but a lot of the output
> > can be useful to fix the bugs.
> >
> > What's nice about the tool is that the output is the source code
> > annotated with the branch decisions that were taken to point out to the
> > case where a bug would be triggered.
> >
> > Doing this for all the targets takes a really long time plus lots of
> > disk space (I stopped the compile at 400M of clang output).
> >
> > If there's interest in this kind of result, I can post a link to the
> > list every week or so. However, some bugs reported make it slightly less
> > appealing as real bugs could get lost in the noise.
> 
> I'd be very interested in the results of Sparc32 and Sparc64 analyses.

OK, I added the two targets to the run and got the following result:

http://amitshah.fedorapeople.org/clang-output/2010-01-13-1/

The bug count went up from 95 for just x86-64 to 131.

However, a lot of these are dups as files get recompiled for each
target.

		Amit