> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Hall [mailto:mhall at mhcomputing.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 6:49 PM
> To: Mcnamara, John
> Cc: Stephen Hemminger; Thomas Monjalon; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
&
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:38:22AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> It looked like SonarQube was both non-free for doing any real scans,
> and the default C rules were oriented towards a completely different
> Windows oriented coding style.
I was using the free version to do SA dashboad for a
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 07:21:24PM +, Mcnamara, John wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> I definitely be interested in getting SonarQube working with DPDK. We can
> sync up on this as soon as the 2.2 bush fires die down.
>
> John.
Awesome! Looking forward to it.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:12:04AM +, Mcnamara, John wrote:
> If people haven't already done so I would urge them to sign up and view/fix
> the defects.
>
> https://scan.coverity.com/users/sign_up
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/4005 (DPDK)
Hi John,
I got signed up. Thanks for
; dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:12:04AM +, Mcnamara, John wrote:
> > > If people haven't already done so I would urge them to sign up and
> > view/fix the defects
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 10:19 PM
> To: Stephen Hemminger
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
>
> 2
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 10:05 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Coverity policy for upstream (base) drivers.
>
> Look
2015-11-12 14:05, Stephen Hemminger:
> Looking at the Coverity scan for DPDK, it looks like all the base
> drivers are marked to be ignored.
>
> Although the changes to base drivers should not be done directly through
> DPDK list. I think it is still valuable to have these driver scanned and
>
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 02:05:08PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Looking at the Coverity scan for DPDK, it looks like all the base
> drivers are marked to be ignored.
>
> Although the changes to base drivers should not be done directly through
> DPDK list. I think it is still valuable to have
Looking at the Coverity scan for DPDK, it looks like all the base
drivers are marked to be ignored.
Although the changes to base drivers should not be done directly through
DPDK list. I think it is still valuable to have these driver scanned and
notify (badger) the vendors to fix there code.
10 matches
Mail list logo
