Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
That seems to be a valid question...
Fun with NULL pointers, part 2
Posted Jul 22, 2009 21:04 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
there are a number of trends (not very surprising in retrospect)
if you have a false positive, the chances of anyone paying attention to further reports in that section of the code drop drasticly.
if you have a maintainer who looks at one report, the chances of them dealing with all of them in that area go up significantly
if a fix is produced as a result of a report, the chances of all the reports for a given area being looked at and fixed go up drasticly
if there is not an active maintainer of that section of code the chances of the reports being looked at go down drasticly.
a large percentage of real bugs and vunerabilities have had reports on that section of the code (note that this is _not_ the same thing as saying that a large percentage of reports have been found to cause real bugs and vunerabilities)
there is a significant push from kernel developers to avoid rushing to clean up the code to silence the warnings, there is a large enough correlation between these reports and more significant bugs that many of them want the entire section where reports are found to be examined, there is a significant chance that there is a more significant and subtle bug lurking in that area.
Posted Jul 23, 2009 2:36 UTC (Thu) by spender (subscriber, #23067)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds