On 01/02/2014 07:05 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 01/02/2014 06:27 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
Hi,
I have executed Clang [1] static code analysis tool against GlusterFS
master branch and it reported 7 issues. Not sure if Clang reports less
issues than Coverity or I should change the way to run it. I have
attached the result with this mail for your reference. To view the
result, you need to untar the attachment and open the index.html.
clang detects more issues than the one in this report. We seem to have
got results only from the fuse xlator here. Need to check how we can
trigger other warnings too.
On a related note, I have been looking at the sonar gerrit plugin for
integration [2] with jenkins. It does look like we need to move to
gerrit 2.8 to enable that. I don't have the cycles to upgrade gerrit
right now, but when we do, we should definitely consider integrating
that. The advantage of this plugin is that we get to run static
analysis only on the files that have been changed in the patch and
hence we would be able to look at (possibly more) appropriate issues
relevant to the patch.
I agree, that should be the way to go.
-Vijay
[1] http://clang-analyzer.llvm.org/
Thanks,
Lala
[2] https://github.com/TouK/sonar-gerrit-plugin
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
