From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NV8aB-0001pd-8X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:08:43 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NV8a6-0001nG-E5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:08:42 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33649 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NV8a6-0001n0-69 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:08:38 -0500 Received: from mail-pw0-f43.google.com ([209.85.160.43]:38053) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NV8a4-0005Hj-S1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:08:37 -0500 Received: by pwj11 with SMTP id 11so3676231pwj.2 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:08:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100113070254.GD31063@amit-x200.redhat.com> References: <20100112181307.GD19438@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20100113070254.GD31063@amit-x200.redhat.com> From: Blue Swirl Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:08:11 +0000 Message-ID: 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: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Amit Shah wrote: > On (Tue) Jan 12 2010 [19:35:08], Blue Swirl wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Amit Shah 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. Thanks. I fixed the warnings related to Sparc32. Were there really no new warnings for Sparc64?