Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:51:06 +0200
From: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, 
	Martin Tuma <martin.tuma@...iteqautomotive.com>, 
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>, 
	Hugues Fruchet <hugues.fruchet@...s.st.com>, Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...s.st.com>, 
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, 
	Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, 
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>, 
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>, 
	Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>, 
	Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, 
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, 
	Sergey Kozlov <serjk@...up.ru>, Abylay Ospan <aospan@...up.ru>, 
	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>, Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>, 
	Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@...il.com>, Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>, 
	"Bryan O'Donoghue" <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, 
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Benjamin Mugnier <benjamin.mugnier@...s.st.com>, 
	Sylvain Petinot <sylvain.petinot@...s.st.com>, Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>, 
	Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>, 
	Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>, 
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, 
	Oleg Drokin <green@...uxhacker.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/35] media: Fix coccinelle warning/errors

Hi Laurent

On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 at 12:53, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ricardo,
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 06:19:14PM +0200, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 at 17:51, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:47:17AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > In my opinion, it's better to just ignore old warnings.
> > >
> > > I agree. Whatever checkers we enable, whatever code we test, there will
> > > always be false positives. A CI system needs to be able to ignore those
> > > false positives and only warn about new issues.
> >
> > We already have support for that:
> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/linux-media/media-ci/-/tree/main/testdata/static?ref_type=heads
>
> Those are manually written filters. Would it be possible to reduce the
> manual step to flagging something as a false positive, and have a
> machine build the filters ?
>

Do you expect that the list of exceptions will grow?

I hope that once the CI is in place we will fix the warnings before
they land in the tree.


> > But it would be great if those lists were as small as possible:
> >
> > - If we have a lot of warnings, two error messages can be combined and
> > will scape the filters
> > eg:
> > print(AAAA);
> > print(BBBB);
> > > AABBBAAB
> >
> > - The filters might hide new errors if they are too broad
> >
> >
> > Most of the patches in this series are simple and make a nicer code:
> > Eg the non return minmax() ,
> > Other patches show real integer overflows.
> >
> > Now that the patches are ready, let's bite the bullet and try to
> > reduce our technical debt.
> >
> > > > When code is new the warnings are going to be mostly correct.  The
> > > > original author is there and knows what the code does.  Someone has
> > > > the hardware ready to test any changes.  High value, low burden.
> > > >
> > > > When the code is old only the false positives are left.  No one is
> > > > testing the code.  It's low value, high burden.
> > > >
> > > > Plus it puts static checker authors in a difficult place because now
> > > > people have to work around our mistakes.  It creates animosity.
> > > >
> > > > Now we have to hold ourselves to a much higher standard for false
> > > > positives.  It sounds like I'm complaining and lazy, right?  But Oleg
> > > > Drokin has told me previously that I spend too much time trying to
> > > > silence false positives instead of working on new code.  He's has a
> > > > point which is that actually we have limited amount of time and we have
> > > > to make choices about what's the most useful thing we can do.
> > > >
> > > > So what I do and what the zero day bot does is we look at warnings one
> > > > time and we re-review old warnings whenever a file is changed.
> > > >
> > > > Kernel developers are very good at addressing static checker warnings
> > > > and fixing the real issues...  People sometimes ask me to create a
> > > > database of warnings which I have reviewed but the answer is that
> > > > anything old can be ignored.  As I write this, I've had a thought that
> > > > instead of a database of false positives maybe we should record a
> > > > database of real bugs to ensure that the fixes for anything real is
> > > > applied.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart



-- 
Ricardo Ribalda

Powered by blists - more mailing lists