On Thu, 22 April 2010 11:22:42 +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 03:15:22PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > > > Did you use a tool to find this? And if yes, where would I find it? ;) > > > > This is smatch stuff (http://smatch.sf.net). > > The problem is that it's a private modification where I made it print > errors if we pass an ERR_PTR to a function. After I send out 10 patches > today that modification will only print false positives... Normally the > false positives are cases where the function accepts ERR_PTRs as a > paramater. I need to kill most of the false positives before I can push > the change. > > The good thing about Smatch is that it's easy to compile, but the bad > thing is that it's false positive heavy. :) I'll need to take a closer look sometime. Years back I wrote a callgraph generator based on smatch. Goal was to calculate the max stack consumption across the complete kernel, but it can be used for other purposes as well. I remember having to patch gcc 3.1 as part of the exercise, so obviously the code has bitrotted since and needs some care. Jörn -- Never argue with idiots - first they drag you down to their level, then they beat you with experience. -- unknown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
