[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220331081409.GY12805@kadam>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 11:14:10 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org, cocci@...ia.fr,
smatch@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, julia.lawall@...ia.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Documentation: dev-tools: Enhance static analysis
section with discussion
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:48:13AM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> > +
> > +Smatch does flow analysis and, if allowed to build the function database, it
> > +also does cross function analysis. Smatch tries to answer questions like where
> > +is this buffer allocated? How big is it? Can this index be controlled by the
> > +user? Is this variable larger than that variable?
> > +
> > +It's generally easier to write checks in Smatch than it is to write checks in
> > +Sparse. Nevertheless, there are some overlaps between Sparse and Smatch checks
> > +because there is no reason for re-implementing Sparse's check in Smatch.
>
> This last sentence isn't totally clear to me. Should this "because" be "so"?
>
I stopped reading your email when you wrote "Cheers, David" but I should
have scrolled down.
There is not very much overlap between Sparse and Smatch. Both have a
warning for if (!x & y). That is a tiny thing. The big overlap is when
it comes to the locking checks. The Smatch check for locking is
honestly way better and more capable.
I always run both Sparse and Smatch on my patches. I should run
Coccinelle as well, but I'm more familiar with Sparse and Smatch.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists