From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUmWh-0004ok-Uo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:40 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NUmWc-0004hq-QV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:39 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57887 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NUmWc-0004hd-Gb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:34 -0500
Received: from mail-pz0-f188.google.com ([209.85.222.188]:37199)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1NUmWb-0003aq-UY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:35:34 -0500
Received: by pzk26 with SMTP id 26so13255679pzk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:35:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20100112181307.GD19438@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <20100112181307.GD19438@amit-x200.redhat.com>
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:35:08 +0000
Message-ID: <f43fc5581001121135x790c1fb1yf3ba5883ac6bd8c3@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Static analysis using clang on the x86_64 target
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

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.