Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:56:12 +0100 From: Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ulrich_Sp=F6rlein?= <uqs@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FYI: clang static analyzer page has moved to http://scan.freebsd.your.org/freebsd-head/ Message-ID: <4184C8F2-3C6D-46FB-8F10-DDEBA6DB1C35@cederstrand.dk> In-Reply-To: <20110105131439.GN23329@acme.spoerlein.net> References: <20110105131439.GN23329@acme.spoerlein.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Den 05/01/2011 kl. 14.14 skrev Ulrich Spörlein: > Hello folks, > > Now that I'm fairly confident that the stability issues with your.org's > VMs have been resolved, I'd like to point you to the new and improved, > semi-weekly analyzer runs at > > http://scan.freebsd.your.org/freebsd-head/ I had a look at this again. There are over 9.000 reports so it's a bit overwhelming, but I suspect there's a lot of "collateral damage". Ignoring contrib code for the moment, I decided to look at usr.sbin.pw from 2011-01-05. There's one report (http://scan.freebsd.your.org/freebsd-head/usr.sbin.pw/2011-01-05-amd64/report-KkilQ3.html#EndPath) which turns out to be a false positive: * Step 6 calls cmdhelp() on line 168; * cmdhelp() ends with "exit(EXIT_FAILURE);" on line 432 which I assume is exit(3) from libc * The analyzer doesn't know that this function never returns and continues to flag a null dereference in step 8 What's the fix here? I think the reports are an excellent way to get acquainted with FreeBSD code. Marking and fixing the false positives would make bug-hunting in the remaining reports more motivating :-) Thanks, Erikhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4184C8F2-3C6D-46FB-8F10-DDEBA6DB1C35>