| Message ID | 20221128141006.8719-3-luca.fancellu@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Static analyser finding deviation | expand |
On 28.11.2022 15:10, Luca Fancellu wrote: > Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py > script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. > > Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed > on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional > html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. > > With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files > that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and > improve the analysis. > > To do so: > - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. > - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. > - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis > script package and rework the code to integrate it. > - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. > - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's > used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the > make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled > file together with the file compilation. > - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck > gets confused as the file does not contain c code. > - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file > - update documentation. > - update .gitignore > > Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> Just two and a half questions, not a full review: > --- > .gitignore | 8 +- > docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- > docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- > docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + > docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- > xen/Makefile | 116 +------- > xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + > xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- > xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ What are these last five files about? There's nothing about them in the description afaics. > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py > @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/env python3 > + > +import os, re, shutil > +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils > + > +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" > +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" > +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" > +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" > +xen_cc = "" > + > +def get_make_vars(): > + global xen_cc > + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( > + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" > + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), > + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, > + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" > + ) > + > + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) > + if cc_var_regex: > + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) > + > + if xen_cc == "": > + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") What use is CC without CFLAGS? Once again the description could do with containing some information on what's going on here, and why you need to export any variables in the first place. > +if [ -n "${CC_FILE}" ]; > +then > + for path in ${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} > + do > + if [[ ${CC_FILE} == *${path}* ]] > + then > + IGNORE_PATH="y" > + echo "${0}: ${CC_FILE} ignored by --ignore-path matching *${path}*" > + fi > + done > + if [ "${IGNORE_PATH}" = "n" ] > + then > + JDB_FILE="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE}".json)" > + > + # Prepare the Json Compilation Database for the file > + create_jcd "${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS}" > + > + out_file="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE%.c}".cppcheck.txt)" > + > + # Check wchar size > + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" > + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one > + # applied to the file by the compiler > + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ > + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') > + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] > + then > + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" > + fi > + > + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile > + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" Purely cosmetic, but still: Why is "t" part of the suffix rather than being part of the expression here (allowing e.g. a grep for "wchar_t" to hit here)? Jan
> On 28 Nov 2022, at 15:19, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > On 28.11.2022 15:10, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py >> script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. >> >> Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed >> on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional >> html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. >> >> With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files >> that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and >> improve the analysis. >> >> To do so: >> - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. >> - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. >> - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis >> script package and rework the code to integrate it. >> - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. >> - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's >> used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the >> make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled >> file together with the file compilation. >> - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck >> gets confused as the file does not contain c code. >> - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file >> - update documentation. >> - update .gitignore >> >> Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> > > Just two and a half questions, not a full review: > >> --- >> .gitignore | 8 +- >> docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- >> docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- >> docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + >> docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- >> xen/Makefile | 116 +------- >> xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + >> xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- >> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ >> .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ >> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- >> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- >> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- >> xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ >> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > > What are these last five files about? There's nothing about them in > the description afaics. They are cppcheck platform configuration files, they help cppcheck to understand the size of the types depending on the target of the compilation. This section in the commit message is to introduce them: With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and improve the analysis. Do you think I should say it differently? Or maybe say that they reside in xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/ ? > >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py >> @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ >> +#!/usr/bin/env python3 >> + >> +import os, re, shutil >> +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils >> + >> +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): >> + pass >> + >> +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): >> + pass >> + >> +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): >> + pass >> + >> +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" >> +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" >> +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" >> +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" >> +xen_cc = "" >> + >> +def get_make_vars(): >> + global xen_cc >> + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( >> + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" >> + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), >> + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, >> + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" >> + ) >> + >> + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) >> + if cc_var_regex: >> + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) >> + >> + if xen_cc == "": >> + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") > > What use is CC without CFLAGS? Once again the description could do > with containing some information on what's going on here, and why > you need to export any variables in the first place. We don’t need CFLAGS here, we need only CC to generate include/generated/compiler-def.h and to pass CC to the cppcheck-cc.sh --compiler argument. Would a comment in the code be ok? > >> +if [ -n "${CC_FILE}" ]; >> +then >> + for path in ${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} >> + do >> + if [[ ${CC_FILE} == *${path}* ]] >> + then >> + IGNORE_PATH="y" >> + echo "${0}: ${CC_FILE} ignored by --ignore-path matching *${path}*" >> + fi >> + done >> + if [ "${IGNORE_PATH}" = "n" ] >> + then >> + JDB_FILE="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE}".json)" >> + >> + # Prepare the Json Compilation Database for the file >> + create_jcd "${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS}" >> + >> + out_file="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE%.c}".cppcheck.txt)" >> + >> + # Check wchar size >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" >> + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one >> + # applied to the file by the compiler >> + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ >> + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') >> + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] >> + then >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" >> + fi >> + >> + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile >> + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" > > Purely cosmetic, but still: Why is "t" part of the suffix rather than > being part of the expression here (allowing e.g. a grep for "wchar_t" > to hit here)? No reason, I don’t have a strong objection to change it > > Jan
On 28.11.2022 16:37, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> On 28 Nov 2022, at 15:19, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: >> On 28.11.2022 15:10, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py >>> script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. >>> >>> Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed >>> on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional >>> html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. >>> >>> With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files >>> that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and >>> improve the analysis. >>> >>> To do so: >>> - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. >>> - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. >>> - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis >>> script package and rework the code to integrate it. >>> - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. >>> - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's >>> used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the >>> make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled >>> file together with the file compilation. >>> - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck >>> gets confused as the file does not contain c code. >>> - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file >>> - update documentation. >>> - update .gitignore >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> >> >> Just two and a half questions, not a full review: >> >>> --- >>> .gitignore | 8 +- >>> docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- >>> docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- >>> docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + >>> docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- >>> xen/Makefile | 116 +------- >>> xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + >>> xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- >>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ >>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- >>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- >>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >> >> What are these last five files about? There's nothing about them in >> the description afaics. > > They are cppcheck platform configuration files, they help cppcheck to understand > the size of the types depending on the target of the compilation. > > This section in the commit message is to introduce them: > > With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files > that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and > improve the analysis. > > Do you think I should say it differently? Or maybe say that they reside in xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/ ? Perhaps (I didn't read that paragraph as relating to _anything_ in tree), e.g.: With this patch cppcheck will benefit from platform configuration files that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and improve the analysis. These are XML files placed in xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/, describing ... (I don't know what to put here). Please write the description here such that people not familiar with cppcheck (or more generally with any external tool) can still follow what you're talking about and what the patch is doing. >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py >>> @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ >>> +#!/usr/bin/env python3 >>> + >>> +import os, re, shutil >>> +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils >>> + >>> +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): >>> + pass >>> + >>> +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): >>> + pass >>> + >>> +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): >>> + pass >>> + >>> +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" >>> +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" >>> +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" >>> +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" >>> +xen_cc = "" >>> + >>> +def get_make_vars(): >>> + global xen_cc >>> + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( >>> + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" >>> + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), >>> + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, >>> + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" >>> + ) >>> + >>> + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) >>> + if cc_var_regex: >>> + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) >>> + >>> + if xen_cc == "": >>> + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") >> >> What use is CC without CFLAGS? Once again the description could do >> with containing some information on what's going on here, and why >> you need to export any variables in the first place. > > We don’t need CFLAGS here, we need only CC to generate include/generated/compiler-def.h and > to pass CC to the cppcheck-cc.sh --compiler argument. Hmm, I see that include/generated/compiler-def.h is generated already now without any use of CFLAGS. Which looks suspicious to me. Sadly the uses in xen/Makefile are lacking any details on what this is for, and Bertrand's commit introducing it doesn't explain its purpose either. Maybe again something entirely obvious to people knowing cppcheck sufficiently well ... > Would a comment in the code be ok? Not sure (yet). Jan
> On 29 Nov 2022, at 09:42, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > On 28.11.2022 16:37, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> On 28 Nov 2022, at 15:19, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>> On 28.11.2022 15:10, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>>> Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py >>>> script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. >>>> >>>> Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed >>>> on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional >>>> html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. >>>> >>>> With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files >>>> that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and >>>> improve the analysis. >>>> >>>> To do so: >>>> - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. >>>> - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. >>>> - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis >>>> script package and rework the code to integrate it. >>>> - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. >>>> - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's >>>> used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the >>>> make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled >>>> file together with the file compilation. >>>> - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck >>>> gets confused as the file does not contain c code. >>>> - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file >>>> - update documentation. >>>> - update .gitignore >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> >>> >>> Just two and a half questions, not a full review: >>> >>>> --- >>>> .gitignore | 8 +- >>>> docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- >>>> docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- >>>> docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + >>>> docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- >>>> xen/Makefile | 116 +------- >>>> xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + >>>> xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- >>>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>> .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ >>>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- >>>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- >>>> xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ >>>> xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ >>> >>> What are these last five files about? There's nothing about them in >>> the description afaics. >> >> They are cppcheck platform configuration files, they help cppcheck to understand >> the size of the types depending on the target of the compilation. >> >> This section in the commit message is to introduce them: >> >> With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files >> that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and >> improve the analysis. >> >> Do you think I should say it differently? Or maybe say that they reside in xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/ ? > > Perhaps (I didn't read that paragraph as relating to _anything_ in > tree), e.g.: > > With this patch cppcheck will benefit from platform configuration files > that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and > improve the analysis. These are XML files placed in > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/, describing ... (I don't know what to put here). > > Please write the description here such that people not familiar with > cppcheck (or more generally with any external tool) can still follow > what you're talking about and what the patch is doing. Ok I can modify the description to add more details > >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ >>>> +#!/usr/bin/env python3 >>>> + >>>> +import os, re, shutil >>>> +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils >>>> + >>>> +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): >>>> + pass >>>> + >>>> +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): >>>> + pass >>>> + >>>> +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): >>>> + pass >>>> + >>>> +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" >>>> +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" >>>> +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" >>>> +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" >>>> +xen_cc = "" >>>> + >>>> +def get_make_vars(): >>>> + global xen_cc >>>> + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( >>>> + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" >>>> + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), >>>> + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, >>>> + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" >>>> + ) >>>> + >>>> + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) >>>> + if cc_var_regex: >>>> + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) >>>> + >>>> + if xen_cc == "": >>>> + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") >>> >>> What use is CC without CFLAGS? Once again the description could do >>> with containing some information on what's going on here, and why >>> you need to export any variables in the first place. >> >> We don’t need CFLAGS here, we need only CC to generate include/generated/compiler-def.h and >> to pass CC to the cppcheck-cc.sh --compiler argument. > > Hmm, I see that include/generated/compiler-def.h is generated already > now without any use of CFLAGS. Which looks suspicious to me. Sadly > the uses in xen/Makefile are lacking any details on what this is for, > and Bertrand's commit introducing it doesn't explain its purpose > either. Maybe again something entirely obvious to people knowing > cppcheck sufficiently well ... > >> Would a comment in the code be ok? > > Not sure (yet). > > Jan
On Mon, 28 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py > script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. > > Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed > on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional > html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. > > With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files > that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and > improve the analysis. > > To do so: > - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. > - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. > - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis > script package and rework the code to integrate it. > - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. > - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's > used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the > make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled > file together with the file compilation. > - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck > gets confused as the file does not contain c code. > - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file > - update documentation. > - update .gitignore > > Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst More below > --- > .gitignore | 8 +- > docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- > docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- > docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + > docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- > xen/Makefile | 116 +------- > xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + > xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- > xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- > xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ > xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py | 86 ------ > 20 files changed, 899 insertions(+), 255 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > create mode 100644 xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py > create mode 100644 xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py > create mode 100755 xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh > create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml > create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml > create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml > create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml > create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml > delete mode 100755 xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py > > diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore > index f5a66f6194dd..68566d0c2587 100644 > --- a/.gitignore > +++ b/.gitignore > @@ -7,9 +7,11 @@ > *.o > *.d > *.d2 > -*.c.cppcheck > +*.cppcheck.txt > +*.cppcheck.xml > *.opic > *.a > +*.c.json > *.safparse > *.so > *.so.[0-9]* > @@ -282,9 +284,11 @@ xen/arch/*/efi/efi.h > xen/arch/*/efi/pe.c > xen/arch/*/efi/runtime.c > xen/arch/*/include/asm/asm-offsets.h > +xen/build-dir-cppcheck/ > xen/common/config_data.S > xen/common/config.gz > xen/cppcheck-htmlreport/ > +xen/cppcheck-report/ > xen/cppcheck-misra.* > xen/include/headers*.chk > xen/include/compat/* > @@ -315,7 +319,7 @@ xen/xsm/flask/xenpolicy-* > tools/flask/policy/policy.conf > tools/flask/policy/xenpolicy-* > xen/xen > -xen/xen-cppcheck.xml > +xen/suppression-list.txt > xen/xen-syms > xen/xen-syms.map > xen/xen.* > diff --git a/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt b/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > index 25d8c3050b72..f7b9f678b4d5 100644 > --- a/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > +++ b/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > @@ -3,8 +3,7 @@ Cppcheck for Xen static and MISRA analysis > > Xen can be analysed for both static analysis problems and MISRA violation using > cppcheck, the open source tool allows the creation of a report with all the > -findings. Xen has introduced the support in the Makefile so it's very easy to > -use and in this document we can see how. > +findings. > > The minimum version required for cppcheck is 2.7. Note that at the time of > writing (June 2022), the version 2.8 is known to be broken [1]. > @@ -38,27 +37,7 @@ Dependencies are listed in the readme.md of the project repository. > Use cppcheck to analyse Xen > =========================== > > -Using cppcheck integration is very simple, it requires few steps: > - > - 1) Compile Xen > - 2) call the cppcheck make target to generate a report in xml format: > - make CPPCHECK_MISRA=y cppcheck > - 3) call the cppcheck-html make target to generate a report in xml and html > - format: > - make CPPCHECK_MISRA=y cppcheck-html > - > - In case the cppcheck binaries are not in the PATH, CPPCHECK and > - CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT variables can be overridden with the full path to the > - binaries: > - > - make -C xen \ > - CPPCHECK=/path/to/cppcheck \ > - CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT=/path/to/cppcheck-htmlreport \ > - CPPCHECK_MISRA=y \ > - cppcheck-html > - > -The output is by default in a folder named cppcheck-htmlreport, but the name > -can be changed by passing it in the CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR variable. > - > +To analyse Xen using cppcheck, please refer to the document > +xen-static-analysis.rst, section "Analyse Xen with Cppcheck". > > [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/cppcheck/discussion/general/thread/bfc3ab6c41/?limit=25 > diff --git a/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst b/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > index 1d23447556d2..31dafd5d4ece 100644 > --- a/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > +++ b/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ Here is an example to add a new justification in safe.json:: > | { > | "id": "SAF-0-safe", > | "analyser": { > +| "cppcheck": "misra-c2012-20.7", > | "coverity": "misra_c_2012_rule_20_7_violation", > | "eclair": "MC3R1.R20.7" > | }, > @@ -77,9 +78,9 @@ Here is an explanation of the fields inside an object of the "content" array: > It tells the tool to substitute a Xen in-code comment having this structure: > /* SAF-0-safe [...] \*/ > - analyser: it is an object containing pair of key-value strings, the key is > - the analyser, so it can be coverity or eclair, the value is the proprietary > - id corresponding on the finding, for example when coverity is used as > - analyser, the tool will translate the Xen in-code coment in this way: > + the analyser, so it can be cppcheck, coverity or eclair, the value is the > + proprietary id corresponding on the finding, for example when coverity is > + used as analyser, the tool will translate the Xen in-code coment in this way: > /* SAF-0-safe [...] \*/ -> /* coverity[misra_c_2012_rule_20_7_violation] \*/ > if the object doesn't have a key-value, then the corresponding in-code > comment won't be translated. > diff --git a/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json b/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..5d4da2ce6170 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ > +{ > + "version": "1.0", > + "content": [ > + { > + "id": "SAF-0-false-positive-cppcheck", > + "violation-id": "", > + "tool-version": "", > + "name": "Sentinel", > + "text": "Next ID to be used" > + } > + ] > +} > diff --git a/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst b/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst > index 5b886474d4a0..2712255db1b0 100644 > --- a/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst > +++ b/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst > @@ -7,9 +7,8 @@ The Xen codebase integrates some scripts and tools that helps the developer to > perform static analysis of the code, currently Xen supports three analysis tool > that are eclair, coverity and cppcheck. > The Xen tree has a script (xen-analysis.py) available to ease the analysis > -process and it integrates a way to suppress findings on these tools (only Eclair > -and Coverity are currently supported by the script), please check the > -documenting-violation.rst document to know more about it. > +process and it integrates a way to suppress findings on these tools, please > +check the documenting-violation.rst document to know more about it. > > Analyse Xen with Coverity or Eclair > ----------------------------------- > @@ -52,3 +51,40 @@ When invoking the script, the procedure below will be followed: > this step, call the script adding the --no-clean argument, but before > running again the script, call it with the --clean-only argument, that will > execute only this cleaning step. > + > + > +Analyse Xen with Cppcheck > +------------------------- > + > +Cppcheck tool is integrated in xen-analysis.py script, when using the script, > +the tool will be called on every source file compiled by the make build system. > +Here how to start the analysis with Cppcheck: > + > + - xen-analysis.py --run-cppcheck [--cppcheck-misra] [--cppcheck-html] -- > + [optional make arguments] > + > +The command above tells the script to prepare the codebase and use Cppcheck tool > +for the analysis. > +The optional argument --cppcheck-misra activates the analysis also for MISRA > +compliance. > +The optional argument --cppcheck-html instruct cppcheck to produce an additional > +HTML report. > + > +When invoking the script for Cppcheck analysis, the followed procedure is > +similar to the one above for Coverity or Eclair, but it has some additional > +steps: > + > + 1. This step is the same as step 1 for Coverity/Eclair. > + 2. The cppcheck dependency are created, build directory for cppcheck analysis > + and an header file containing internal compiler macro > + (include/generated/compiler-def.h) are generated > + 3. Xen compilation starts using every <additional make parameters> supplied > + at the script invocation, but because cppcheck is not able to intercept the > + compiled files and flags on compiler invocation, a script (cppcheck-cc.sh) > + is passed as CC to the make system, it is a wrapper for the compiler that > + will also execute cppcheck on every compiled file. > + 4. After the compilation and analysis, the cppcheck report will be created > + putting together all the cppcheck report fragments for every analysed file. > + Cppcheck will produce a text fragment and an additional XML report fragment > + if the script is configured to produce the HTML output. > + 5. This step is the same as step 3 for Coverity/Eclair. > diff --git a/xen/Makefile b/xen/Makefile > index 9d0df5e2c543..77926724bcd7 100644 > --- a/xen/Makefile > +++ b/xen/Makefile > @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ endif # need-config > > __all: build > > -main-targets := build install uninstall clean distclean MAP cppcheck cppcheck-html > +main-targets := build install uninstall clean distclean MAP > .PHONY: $(main-targets) > ifneq ($(XEN_TARGET_ARCH),x86_32) > $(main-targets): %: _% ; > @@ -566,18 +566,16 @@ _clean: > $(Q)$(MAKE) $(clean)=tools/kconfig > find . \( -name "*.o" -o -name ".*.d" -o -name ".*.d2" \ > -o -name ".*.o.tmp" -o -name "*~" -o -name "core" \ > - -o -name '*.lex.c' -o -name '*.tab.[ch]' -o -name '*.c.cppcheck' \ > - -o -name "*.gcno" -o -name ".*.cmd" -o -name "lib.a" \) -exec rm -f {} \; > + -o -name '*.lex.c' -o -name '*.tab.[ch]' -o -name "*.gcno" \ > + -o -name ".*.cmd" -o -name "lib.a" \) -exec rm -f {} \; > rm -f include/asm $(TARGET) $(TARGET).gz $(TARGET)-syms $(TARGET)-syms.map > rm -f $(TARGET).efi $(TARGET).efi.map $(TARGET).efi.stripped > rm -f asm-offsets.s arch/*/include/asm/asm-offsets.h > rm -f .banner .allconfig.tmp include/xen/compile.h > - rm -f cppcheck-misra.* xen-cppcheck.xml > > .PHONY: _distclean > _distclean: clean > rm -f tags TAGS cscope.files cscope.in.out cscope.out cscope.po.out GTAGS GPATH GRTAGS GSYMS .config source > - rm -rf $(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) > > $(TARGET).gz: $(TARGET) > gzip -n -f -9 < $< > $@.new > @@ -651,111 +649,9 @@ cloc: > done; \ > done | cloc --list-file=- > > -# What cppcheck command to use. > -# To get proper results, it is recommended to build cppcheck manually from the > -# latest source and use CPPCHECK to give the full path to the built version. > -CPPCHECK ?= cppcheck > - > -# What cppcheck-htmlreport to use. > -# If you give the full path to a self compiled cppcheck, this should be set > -# to the full path to cppcheck-html in the htmlreport directory of cppcheck. > -# On recent distribution, this is available in the standard path. > -CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT ?= cppcheck-htmlreport > - > -# By default we generate the report in cppcheck-htmlreport directory in the > -# build directory. This can be changed by giving a directory in this variable. > -CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR ?= cppcheck-htmlreport > - > -# By default we do not check misra rules, to enable pass "CPPCHECK_MISRA=y" to > -# make command line. > -CPPCHECK_MISRA ?= n > - > -# Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: > -# - include directories and defines Xen Makefile is passing (from CFLAGS) > -# - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. > -# - define CPPCHECK as we use to disable or enable some specific part of the > -# code to solve some cppcheck issues. > -# - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" > -# which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check file > -# per file. > -# > -# Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h > -# > -CPPCHECKFLAGS := -DCPPCHECK --max-ctu-depth=10 \ > - --enable=style,information,missingInclude \ > - --include=$(srctree)/include/xen/config.h \ > - -I $(srctree)/xsm/flask/include \ > - -I $(srctree)/include/xen/libfdt \ > - $(filter -D% -I%,$(CFLAGS)) > - > -# We need to find all C files (as we are not checking assembly files) so > -# we find all generated .o files which have a .c corresponding file. > -CPPCHECKFILES := $(wildcard $(patsubst $(objtree)/%.o,$(srctree)/%.c, \ > - $(filter-out $(objtree)/tools/%, \ > - $(shell find $(objtree) -name "*.o")))) > - > -# Headers and files required to run cppcheck on a file > -CPPCHECKDEPS := $(objtree)/include/generated/autoconf.h \ > - $(objtree)/include/generated/compiler-def.h > - > -ifeq ($(CPPCHECK_MISRA),y) > - CPPCHECKFLAGS += --addon=cppcheck-misra.json > - CPPCHECKDEPS += cppcheck-misra.json > -endif > - > -quiet_cmd_cppcheck_xml = CPPCHECK $(patsubst $(srctree)/%,%,$<) > -cmd_cppcheck_xml = $(CPPCHECK) -v -q --xml $(CPPCHECKFLAGS) \ > - --output-file=$@ $< > - > -quiet_cmd_merge_cppcheck_reports = CPPCHECK-MERGE $@ > -cmd_merge_cppcheck_reports = $(PYTHON) $(srctree)/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py $^ $@ > - > -quiet_cmd_cppcheck_html = CPPCHECK-HTML $< > -cmd_cppcheck_html = $(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT) --file=$< --source-dir=$(srctree) \ > - --report-dir=$(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) --title=Xen > - > -PHONY += _cppcheck _cppcheck-html cppcheck-version > - > -_cppcheck-html: xen-cppcheck.xml > - $(call if_changed,cppcheck_html) > - > -_cppcheck: xen-cppcheck.xml > - > -xen-cppcheck.xml: $(patsubst $(srctree)/%.c,$(objtree)/%.c.cppcheck,$(CPPCHECKFILES)) > -ifeq ($(CPPCHECKFILES),) > - $(error Please build Xen before running cppcheck) > -endif > - $(call if_changed,merge_cppcheck_reports) > - > -$(objtree)/%.c.cppcheck: $(srctree)/%.c $(CPPCHECKDEPS) | cppcheck-version > - $(call if_changed,cppcheck_xml) > - > -cppcheck-version: > - $(Q)if ! which $(CPPCHECK) > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ > - echo "Cannot find cppcheck executable: $(CPPCHECK)"; \ > - exit 1; \ > - fi > - $(Q)if [ "$$($(CPPCHECK) --version | awk '{print ($$2 < 2.7)}')" -eq 1 ]; then \ > - echo "Please upgrade your cppcheck to version 2.7 or greater"; \ > - exit 1; \ > - fi > - > -# List of Misra rules to respect is written inside a doc. > -# In order to have some helpful text in the cppcheck output, generate a text > -# file containing the rules identifier, classification and text from the Xen > -# documentation file. Also generate a json file with the right arguments for > -# cppcheck in json format including the list of rules to ignore. > -# > -# convert_misra_doc.py, producing both targets at the same time, should be > -# executed only once. Utilize a pattern rule to achieve this effect, with the > -# stem kind of arbitrarily chosen to be "cppcheck". > -.PRECIOUS: %-misra.json > -%-misra.txt %-misra.json: $(XEN_ROOT)/docs/misra/rules.rst $(srctree)/tools/convert_misra_doc.py > - $(Q)$(PYTHON) $(srctree)/tools/convert_misra_doc.py -i $< -o $*-misra.txt -j $*-misra.json > - > -# Put this in generated headers this way it is cleaned by include/Makefile > -$(objtree)/include/generated/compiler-def.h: > - $(Q)$(CC) -dM -E -o $@ - < /dev/null > +# Target used by xen-analysis.sh script to retrieve Xen build system variables > +export-variable-%: > + $(info $*=$($*)) > > endif #config-build > endif # need-sub-make > diff --git a/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c b/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c > index 45b6f969d2ab..3d1eb7f04a73 100644 > --- a/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c > +++ b/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c > @@ -60,6 +60,13 @@ > * are possible. > */ > > +/* > + * Cppcheck thinks this file needs to be analysed because it is preprocessed by > + * the compiler, but it gets confused because this file does not contains C > + * code. Hence protect the code when CPPCHECK is used. > + */ > +#ifndef CPPCHECK > + > #ifdef CONFIG_HVM > #define PREFIX_hvm hvm > #else > @@ -286,3 +293,5 @@ mca do do - - - > #ifndef CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE > paging_domctl_cont do do do do - > #endif > + > +#endif /* !CPPCHECK */ > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py > index b5d9ef1862c9..8e50c27cd898 100755 > --- a/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py > @@ -1,28 +1,42 @@ > #!/usr/bin/env python3 > > import sys > -from xen_analysis import settings, generic_analysis > +from xen_analysis import settings, generic_analysis, cppcheck_analysis > from xen_analysis.generic_analysis import * > +from xen_analysis.cppcheck_analysis import * > + > +PhaseExceptions = (GetMakeVarsPhaseError, ParseTagPhaseError, > + CppcheckDepsPhaseError, BuildPhaseError, > + CppcheckReportPhaseError) > > > def main(argv): > ret_code = 0 > settings.parse_commandline(argv) > try: > + if settings.step_get_make_vars: > + cppcheck_analysis.get_make_vars() > if settings.step_parse_tags: > generic_analysis.parse_xen_tags() > + if settings.step_cppcheck_deps: > + cppcheck_analysis.generate_cppcheck_deps() > if settings.step_build_xen: > generic_analysis.build_xen() > - except (ParseTagPhaseError, BuildPhaseError) as e: > + if settings.step_cppcheck_report: > + cppcheck_analysis.generate_cppcheck_report() > + except PhaseExceptions as e: > print("ERROR: {}".format(e)) > if hasattr(e, "errorcode"): > ret_code = e.errorcode > finally: > if settings.step_clean_analysis: > + cppcheck_analysis.clean_analysis_artifacts() > e = generic_analysis.clean_analysis_artifacts() > if e: > print("ERROR: {}".format(e)) > ret_code = 1 > + if settings.step_distclean_analysis: > + cppcheck_analysis.clean_reports() > > sys.exit(ret_code) > > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..e5c2f3be3e85 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py > @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/env python3 > + > +import os, re, shutil > +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils > + > +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): > + pass > + > +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" > +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" > +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" > +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" > +xen_cc = "" > + > +def get_make_vars(): > + global xen_cc > + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( > + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" > + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), > + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, > + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" > + ) > + > + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) > + if cc_var_regex: > + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) > + > + if xen_cc == "": > + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") > + > + > +def __generate_suppression_list(out_file): > + # The following lambda function will return a file if it contains lines with > + # a comment containing "cppcheck-suppress[*]" on a single line. > + grep_action = lambda x: utils.grep(x, > + r'^[ \t]*/\* cppcheck-suppress\[(.*)\] \*/$') > + # Look for a list of .h files that matches the condition above > + headers = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.xen_dir, r'.*\.h$', > + grep_action) > + > + try: > + with open(out_file, "wt") as supplist_file: > + # Add this rule to skip every finding in the autogenerated > + # header for cppcheck > + supplist_file.write("*:*generated/compiler-def.h\n") > + > + for entry in headers: > + filename = entry["file"] > + try: > + with open(filename, "rt") as infile: > + header_content = infile.readlines() > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( > + "Issue with reading file {}: {}" > + .format(filename, e) > + ) > + header_lines_len = len(header_content) > + # line_num in entry will be header_content[line_num-1], here we > + # are going to search the first line after line_num that have > + # anything different from comments or empty line, because the > + # in-code comment suppression is related to that line then. > + for line_num in entry["matches"]: > + cppcheck_violation_id = "" > + tmp_line = line_num > + # look up to which line is referring the comment at > + # line_num (which would be header_content[tmp_line-1]) > + comment_section = False > + while tmp_line < header_lines_len: > + line = header_content[tmp_line] > + # Matches a line with just optional spaces/tabs and the > + # start of a comment '/*' > + comment_line_starts = re.match('^[ \t]*/\*.*$', line) > + # Matches a line with text and the end of a comment '*/' > + comment_line_stops = re.match('^.*\*/$', line) > + if (not comment_section) and comment_line_starts: > + comment_section = True > + if (len(line.strip()) != 0) and (not comment_section): > + cppcheck_violation_id = entry["matches"][line_num][0] > + break > + if comment_section and comment_line_stops: > + comment_section = False > + tmp_line = tmp_line + 1 > + > + if cppcheck_violation_id == "": > + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( > + "Error matching cppcheck comment in {} at line {}." > + .format(filename, line_num) > + ) > + # Write [error id]:[filename]:[line] > + # tmp_line refers to the array index, so translated to the > + # file line (that begins with 1) it is tmp_line+1 > + supplist_file.write( > + "{}:{}:{}\n".format(cppcheck_violation_id, filename, > + (tmp_line + 1)) > + ) > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" > + .format(out_file, e)) > + > + > +def generate_cppcheck_deps(): > + global cppcheck_extra_make_args > + > + # Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: > + # - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. > + # - define CPPCHECK as we use it to disable or enable some specific part of > + # the code to solve some cppcheck issues. > + # - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" > + # which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check > + # file per file. > + # - Explicitly suppress warnings on compiler-def.h because cppcheck throws > + # an unmatchedSuppression due to the rule we put in suppression-list.txt > + # to skip every finding in the file. > + # > + # Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h > + # > + cppcheck_flags=""" > +--cppcheck-build-dir={}/{} > + --max-ctu-depth=10 > + --enable=style,information,missingInclude > + --template=\'{{file}}({{line}},{{column}}):{{id}}:{{severity}}:{{message}}\' > + --relative-paths={} > + --inline-suppr > + --suppressions-list={}/suppression-list.txt > + --suppress='unmatchedSuppression:*generated/compiler-def.h' > + --include={}/include/xen/config.h I noticed that some of the includes we used to have like xsm/flask/include are missing here. Is that intended? > + -DCPPCHECK > +""".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR, settings.xen_dir, > + settings.outdir, settings.xen_dir) > + > + invoke_cppcheck = utils.invoke_command( > + "{} --version".format(settings.cppcheck_binpath), > + True, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, > + "Error occured retrieving cppcheck version:\n{}\n\n{}" > + ) > + > + version_regex = re.search('^Cppcheck (.*)$', invoke_cppcheck, flags=re.M) > + # Currently, only cppcheck version >= 2.7 is supported, but version 2.8 is > + # known to be broken, please refer to docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > + if (not version_regex) or (version_regex.group(1) != "2.7"): > + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( > + "Can't find cppcheck version or version is not 2.7" > + ) > + > + # If misra option is selected, append misra addon and generate cppcheck > + # files for misra analysis > + if settings.cppcheck_misra: > + cppcheck_flags = cppcheck_flags + " --addon=cppcheck-misra.json" > + > + utils.invoke_command( > + "{}/convert_misra_doc.py -i {}/docs/misra/rules.rst" > + " -o {}/cppcheck-misra.txt -j {}/cppcheck-misra.json" > + .format(settings.tools_dir, settings.repo_dir, > + settings.outdir, settings.outdir), > + False, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, > + "An error occured when running:\n{}" > + ) > + > + # Generate compiler macros > + os.makedirs("{}/include/generated".format(settings.outdir), exist_ok=True) > + utils.invoke_command( > + "{} -dM -E -o \"{}/include/generated/compiler-def.h\" - < /dev/null" > + .format(xen_cc, settings.outdir), > + False, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, > + "An error occured when running:\n{}" > + ) > + > + # Generate cppcheck suppression list > + __generate_suppression_list( > + "{}/suppression-list.txt".format(settings.outdir)) > + > + # Generate cppcheck build folder > + os.makedirs("{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR), > + exist_ok=True) > + > + cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd={} {} > + --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ > +""".format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, cppcheck_flags, > + settings.tools_dir) > + > + if settings.cppcheck_html: > + cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" > + > + # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC > + cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( > + settings.tools_dir, > + cppcheck_cc_flags > + ).replace("\n", "") > + > + > +def generate_cppcheck_report(): > + # Prepare text report > + # Look for a list of .cppcheck.txt files, those are the txt report > + # fragments > + fragments = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, r'.*\.cppcheck.txt$') > + text_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, > + CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR) > + report_filename = "{}/xen-cppcheck.txt".format(text_report_dir) > + os.makedirs(text_report_dir, exist_ok=True) > + try: > + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_merge_txt_fragments(fragments, > + report_filename, > + [settings.xen_dir]) > + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckTXTReportError as e: > + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) > + > + # If HTML output is requested > + if settings.cppcheck_html: > + # Look for a list of .cppcheck.xml files, those are the XML report > + # fragments > + fragments = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, > + r'.*\.cppcheck.xml$') > + html_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, > + CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) > + xml_filename = "{}/xen-cppcheck.xml".format(html_report_dir) > + os.makedirs(html_report_dir, exist_ok=True) > + try: > + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_merge_xml_fragments(fragments, > + xml_filename, > + settings.xen_dir, > + settings.outdir) > + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckHTMLReportError as e: > + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) > + # Call cppcheck-htmlreport utility to generate the HTML output > + utils.invoke_command( > + "{} --file={} --source-dir={} --report-dir={}/html --title=Xen" > + .format(settings.cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath, xml_filename, > + settings.xen_dir, html_report_dir), > + False, CppcheckReportPhaseError, > + "Error occured generating Cppcheck HTML report:\n{}" > + ) > + # Strip src and obj path from *.html files > + html_files = utils.recursive_find_file(html_report_dir, r'.*\.html$') > + try: > + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_strip_path_html(html_files, > + (settings.xen_dir, > + settings.outdir)) > + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckHTMLReportError as e: > + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) > + > + > +def clean_analysis_artifacts(): > + clean_files = ("suppression-list.txt", "cppcheck-misra.txt", > + "cppcheck-misra.json") > + cppcheck_build_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR) > + if os.path.isdir(cppcheck_build_dir): > + shutil.rmtree(cppcheck_build_dir) > + artifact_files = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, > + r'.*\.(?:c\.json|cppcheck\.txt|cppcheck\.xml)$') > + for file in clean_files: > + file = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, file) > + if os.path.isfile(file): > + artifact_files.append(file) > + for delfile in artifact_files: > + os.remove(delfile) > + > + > +def clean_reports(): > + text_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, > + CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR) > + html_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, > + CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) > + if os.path.isdir(text_report_dir): > + shutil.rmtree(text_report_dir) > + if os.path.isdir(html_report_dir): > + shutil.rmtree(html_report_dir) > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..02440aefdfec > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py > @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/env python3 > + > +import os > +from xml.etree import ElementTree > + > +class CppcheckHTMLReportError(Exception): > + pass > + > +class CppcheckTXTReportError(Exception): > + pass > + > + > +def __elements_equal(el1, el2): > + if type(el1) != type(el2): return False > + > + if el1.find('location') is None: return False > + if el2.find('location') is None: return False > + > + el1_location = str(el1.find('location').attrib) > + el2_location = str(el2.find('location').attrib) > + > + if el1_location != el2_location: return False > + > + return True > + > + > +def __contain_element(new, lst): > + for elem in lst: > + if __elements_equal(new, elem): > + return True > + return False > + > + > +def __get_xml_root_file(filename): > + try: > + result_xml_root = ElementTree.parse(filename).getroot() > + except ElementTree.ParseError as e: > + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError( > + "XML parsing error in {}: {}".format(filename, e) > + ) > + return result_xml_root > + > + > +def __sanitize_cppcheck_xml_path(xml_tree, src_path, obj_path): > + # Some path are relative to the source tree but some others are generated > + # in the obj tree, for cppcheck when using cppcheck-htmlreport we can pass > + # only one source tree where the files will be fetched if relative path are > + # found. So for every path that does not exists in src tree, we guess it > + # comes from obj tree and we put explicit absolute path to it > + error_item_root = xml_tree.findall("errors")[0] > + for error_item in error_item_root: > + for location_item in error_item.findall("location"): > + path = location_item.attrib["file"] > + new_obj_path = obj_path + "/" + path > + new_src_path = src_path + "/" + path > + if (path[0] != "/") and (not os.path.isfile(new_src_path)) \ > + and os.path.isfile(new_obj_path): > + location_item.attrib["file"] = new_obj_path > + > + > +def cppcheck_merge_xml_fragments(fragments_list, out_xml_file, src_path, > + obj_path): > + > + result_xml = __get_xml_root_file(fragments_list[0]) > + insert_point = result_xml.findall("errors")[0] > + for xml_file in fragments_list[1:]: > + xml_root = __get_xml_root_file(xml_file) > + curr_elem_list = list(insert_point) > + new_elem_list = list(xml_root.findall("errors")[0]) > + for xml_error_elem in new_elem_list: > + if not __contain_element(xml_error_elem, curr_elem_list): > + insert_point.insert(1, xml_error_elem) > + > + if result_xml is None: > + return False > + > + __sanitize_cppcheck_xml_path(result_xml, src_path, obj_path) > + > + ElementTree.ElementTree(result_xml).write(out_xml_file) > + > + return True > + > + > +def cppcheck_merge_txt_fragments(fragments_list, out_txt_file, strip_paths): > + try: > + with open(out_txt_file, "wt") as outfile: > + # Using a set will remove automatically the duplicate lines > + text_report_content = set() > + for file in fragments_list: > + try: > + with open(file, "rt") as infile: > + frag_lines = infile.readlines() > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckTXTReportError( > + "Issue with reading file {}: {}" > + .format(file, e) > + ) > + text_report_content.update(frag_lines) > + > + # Back to modifiable list > + text_report_content = list(text_report_content) > + # Strip path from report lines > + for i in list(range(0, len(text_report_content))): > + for path in strip_paths: > + text_report_content[i] = text_report_content[i].replace( > + path + "/", "") > + # Write the final text report > + outfile.writelines(text_report_content) > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckTXTReportError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" > + .format(out_txt_file, e)) > + > + > +def cppcheck_strip_path_html(html_files, strip_paths): > + for file in html_files: > + try: > + with open(file, "rt") as infile: > + html_lines = infile.readlines() > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError("Issue with reading file {}: {}" > + .format(file, e)) > + for i in list(range(0, len(html_lines))): > + for path in strip_paths: > + html_lines[i] = html_lines[i].replace(path + "/", "") > + try: > + with open(file, "wt") as outfile: > + outfile.writelines(html_lines) > + except OSError as e: > + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" > + .format(file, e)) > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py > index 0b470c4ecf7d..94122aebace0 100644 > --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > #!/usr/bin/env python3 > > -import os, subprocess > -from . import settings, utils, tag_database > +import os > +from . import settings, utils, tag_database, cppcheck_analysis > > class ParseTagPhaseError(Exception): > pass > @@ -60,18 +60,13 @@ def parse_xen_tags(): > > > def build_xen(): > - try: > - subprocess.run( > - "make -C {} {} build" > - .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), > - shell=True, check=True > + utils.invoke_command( > + "make -C {} {} {} build" > + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args, > + cppcheck_analysis.cppcheck_extra_make_args), > + False, BuildPhaseError, > + "Build error occured when running:\n{}" > ) > - except (subprocess.CalledProcessError, subprocess.SubprocessError) as e: > - excp = BuildPhaseError( > - "Build error occured when running:\n{}".format(e.cmd) > - ) > - excp.errorcode = e.returncode if hasattr(e, 'returncode') else 1 > - raise excp > > > def clean_analysis_artifacts(): > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py > index 947dfa2d50af..bd1faafe79a3 100644 > --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py > @@ -7,14 +7,23 @@ xen_dir = os.path.realpath(module_dir + "/../..") > repo_dir = os.path.realpath(xen_dir + "/..") > tools_dir = os.path.realpath(xen_dir + "/tools") > > +step_get_make_vars = False > step_parse_tags = True > +step_cppcheck_deps = False > step_build_xen = True > +step_cppcheck_report = False > step_clean_analysis = True > +step_distclean_analysis = False > > target_build = False > target_clean = False > +target_distclean = False > > analysis_tool = "" > +cppcheck_binpath = "cppcheck" > +cppcheck_html = False > +cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath = "cppcheck-htmlreport" > +cppcheck_misra = False > make_forward_args = "" > outdir = xen_dir > > @@ -26,29 +35,47 @@ Usage: {} [OPTION] ... [-- [make arguments]] > This script runs the analysis on the Xen codebase. > > Options: > - --build-only Run only the commands to build Xen with the optional make > - arguments passed to the script > - --clean-only Run only the commands to clean the analysis artifacts > - -h, --help Print this help > - --no-build Skip the build Xen phase > - --no-clean Don\'t clean the analysis artifacts on exit > - --run-coverity Run the analysis for the Coverity tool > - --run-eclair Run the analysis for the Eclair tool > + --build-only Run only the commands to build Xen with the optional > + make arguments passed to the script > + --clean-only Run only the commands to clean the analysis artifacts > + --cppcheck-bin= Path to the cppcheck binary (Default: {}) > + --cppcheck-html Produce an additional HTML output report for Cppcheck > + --cppcheck-html-bin= Path to the cppcheck-html binary (Default: {}) > + --cppcheck-misra Activate the Cppcheck MISRA analysis > + --distclean Clean analysis artifacts and reports > + -h, --help Print this help > + --no-build Skip the build Xen phase > + --no-clean Don\'t clean the analysis artifacts on exit > + --run-coverity Run the analysis for the Coverity tool > + --run-cppcheck Run the Cppcheck analysis tool on Xen > + --run-eclair Run the analysis for the Eclair tool > """ > - print(msg.format(sys.argv[0])) > + print(msg.format(sys.argv[0], cppcheck_binpath, > + cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath)) > > > def parse_commandline(argv): > global analysis_tool > + global cppcheck_binpath > + global cppcheck_html > + global cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath > + global cppcheck_misra > global make_forward_args > global outdir > + global step_get_make_vars > global step_parse_tags > + global step_cppcheck_deps > global step_build_xen > + global step_cppcheck_report > global step_clean_analysis > + global step_distclean_analysis > global target_build > global target_clean > + global target_distclean > forward_to_make = False > for option in argv: > + args_with_content_regex = re.match(r'^(--[a-z]+[a-z-]*)=(.*)$', option) > + > if forward_to_make: > # Intercept outdir > outdir_regex = re.match("^O=(.*)$", option) > @@ -60,6 +87,18 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): > target_build = True > elif option == "--clean-only": > target_clean = True > + elif args_with_content_regex and \ > + args_with_content_regex.group(1) == "--cppcheck-bin": > + cppcheck_binpath = args_with_content_regex.group(2) > + elif option == "--cppcheck-html": > + cppcheck_html = True > + elif args_with_content_regex and \ > + args_with_content_regex.group(1) == "--cppcheck-html-bin": > + cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath = args_with_content_regex.group(2) > + elif option == "--cppcheck-misra": > + cppcheck_misra = True > + elif option == "--distclean": > + target_distclean = True > elif (option == "--help") or (option == "-h"): > help() > sys.exit(0) > @@ -69,6 +108,11 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): > step_clean_analysis = False > elif (option == "--run-coverity") or (option == "--run-eclair"): > analysis_tool = option[6:] > + elif (option == "--run-cppcheck"): > + analysis_tool = "cppcheck" > + step_get_make_vars = True > + step_cppcheck_deps = True > + step_cppcheck_report = True > elif option == "--": > forward_to_make = True > else: > @@ -76,13 +120,23 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): > help() > sys.exit(1) > > - if target_build and target_clean: > - print("--build-only is not compatible with --clean-only argument.") > + if target_build and (target_clean or target_distclean): > + print("--build-only is not compatible with --clean-only/--distclean " > + "argument.") > sys.exit(1) > > + if target_distclean: > + # Implicit activation of clean target > + target_clean = True > + > + step_distclean_analysis = True > + > if target_clean: > + step_get_make_vars = False > step_parse_tags = False > + step_cppcheck_deps = False > step_build_xen = False > + step_cppcheck_report = False > step_clean_analysis = True > return > > @@ -95,3 +149,4 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): > step_parse_tags = False > step_build_xen = True > step_clean_analysis = False > + step_cppcheck_report = False > diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py > index a912d812c3df..1193e3f4631e 100644 > --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py > +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > #!/usr/bin/env python3 > > -import os, re > +import os, re, subprocess > > > def grep(filepath, regex): > @@ -35,3 +35,22 @@ def recursive_find_file(path, filename_regex, action = None): > res.append(out) > > return res > + > + > +def invoke_command(command, needs_output, exeption_type = Exception, > + exeption_msg = ""): > + try: > + pipe_stdout = subprocess.PIPE if (needs_output == True) else None > + output = subprocess.run(command, shell=True, check=True, > + stdout=pipe_stdout, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, > + encoding='utf8') > + except (subprocess.CalledProcessError, subprocess.SubprocessError) as e: > + if needs_output == True: > + exeption_msg = exeption_msg.format(e.cmd, output.stdout) > + else: > + exeption_msg = exeption_msg.format(e.cmd) > + excp = exeption_type(exeption_msg) > + excp.errorcode = e.returncode if hasattr(e, 'returncode') else 1 > + raise excp > + > + return output.stdout > diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh b/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh > new file mode 100755 > index 000000000000..e682f6b9d79d > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh > @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/env bash > + > +set -e > + > +function help() { > + cat <<EOF > +Usage: ${0} [OPTION] ... -- <compiler arguments> > + > +This script is a wrapper for cppcheck that enables it to analyse the files that > +are the target for the build, it is used in place of a selected compiler and the > +make process will run it on every file that needs to be built. > +All the arguments passed to the original compiler are forwarded to it without > +modification, furthermore, they are used to improve the cppcheck analysis. > + > +Options: > + --compiler= Use this compiler for the build > + --cppcheck-cmd= Command line for the cppcheck analysis. > + --cppcheck-html Prepare for cppcheck HTML output > + --cppcheck-plat= Path to the cppcheck platform folder > + --ignore-path= This script won't run cppcheck on the files having this > + path, the compiler will run anyway on them. This argument > + can be specified multiple times. > + -h, --help Print this help > +EOF > +} > + > +CC_FILE="" > +COMPILER="" > +CPPCHECK_HTML="n" > +CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="" > +CPPCHECK_TOOL="" > +CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="" > +FORWARD_FLAGS="" > +IGNORE_PATH="n" > +IGNORE_PATH_LIST="" > +JDB_FILE="" > +OBJTREE_PATH="" > + > +# Variable used for arg parsing > +forward_to_cc="n" > +sm_tool_args="n" > +obj_arg_content="n" > + > +for OPTION in "$@" > +do > + if [ "${forward_to_cc}" = "y" ]; then > + if [[ ${OPTION} == *.c ]] > + then > + CC_FILE="${OPTION}" > + elif [ "${OPTION}" = "-o" ] > + then > + # After -o there is the path to the obj file, flag it > + obj_arg_content="y" > + elif [ "${obj_arg_content}" = "y" ] > + then > + # This must be the path to the obj file, turn off flag and save path > + OBJTREE_PATH="$(dirname "${OPTION}")" > + obj_arg_content="n" > + fi > + # Forward any argument to the compiler > + FORWARD_FLAGS="${FORWARD_FLAGS} ${OPTION}" > + continue > + fi > + case ${OPTION} in > + -h|--help) > + help > + exit 0 > + ;; > + --compiler=*) > + COMPILER="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" This can be: COMPILER="${OPTION#*=}" and same for all the other below > + sm_tool_args="n" > + ;; > + --cppcheck-cmd=*) > + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > + sm_tool_args="y" > + ;; > + --cppcheck-html) > + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" > + sm_tool_args="n" > + ;; > + --cppcheck-plat=*) > + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > + sm_tool_args="n" > + ;; > + --ignore-path=*) > + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > + sm_tool_args="n" > + ;; > + --) > + forward_to_cc="y" > + sm_tool_args="n" > + ;; > + *) > + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then > + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" > + else > + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" > + exit 1 It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing something? > + fi > + ;; > + esac > +done > + > +if [ "${COMPILER}" = "" ] > +then > + echo "--compiler arg is mandatory." > + exit 1 > +fi > + > +function print_file() { > + local text="${1}" > + local init_file="${2}" > + > + if [ "${init_file}" = "y" ] > + then > + echo -e -n "${text}" > "${JDB_FILE}" > + else > + echo -e -n "${text}" >> "${JDB_FILE}" > + fi The >> can be used to create a file if the file is not already present. So why the need for this if? In fact, we don't need print_file at all and we can just echo -e -n "something" >> "${JDB_FILE}" directly from create_jcd. If you are concerned about a preexisting file, then at the beginning of create_jcd you can: rm "${JDB_FILE}" > +} > + > +function create_jcd() { > + local line="${1}" > + local arg_num=0 > + local same_line=0 > + > + print_file "[\n" "y" > + print_file " {\n" > + print_file " \"arguments\": [\n" > + > + for arg in ${line}; do > + # This code prevents to put comma in the last element of the list or on > + # sequential lines that are going to be merged > + [ "${arg_num}" -ne 0 ] && [ "${same_line}" -eq 0 ] && print_file ",\n" > + if [ "${same_line}" -ne 0 ] > + then > + print_file "${arg}\"" > + same_line=0 > + elif [ "${arg}" = "-iquote" ] || [ "${arg}" = "-I" ] > + then > + # cppcheck doesn't understand -iquote, substitute with -I > + print_file " \"-I" > + same_line=1 > + else > + print_file " \"${arg}\"" > + fi > + arg_num=$(( arg_num + 1 )) > + done > + print_file "\n" > + print_file " ],\n" > + print_file " \"directory\": \"$(pwd -P)\",\n" > + print_file " \"file\": \"${CC_FILE}\"\n" > + print_file " }\n" > + print_file "]\n" > +} > + > + > +# Execute compiler with forwarded flags > +# Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on FORWARD_FLAGS, but they can't be > +# used here > +# shellcheck disable=SC2086 > +${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS} > + > +if [ -n "${CC_FILE}" ]; > +then > + for path in ${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} > + do > + if [[ ${CC_FILE} == *${path}* ]] > + then > + IGNORE_PATH="y" > + echo "${0}: ${CC_FILE} ignored by --ignore-path matching *${path}*" > + fi > + done > + if [ "${IGNORE_PATH}" = "n" ] > + then > + JDB_FILE="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE}".json)" > + > + # Prepare the Json Compilation Database for the file > + create_jcd "${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS}" > + > + out_file="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE%.c}".cppcheck.txt)" > + > + # Check wchar size > + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" > + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one > + # applied to the file by the compiler > + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ > + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') > + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] > + then > + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" > + fi This seems a bit unnecessary: we should be able to find the right platform file from XEN_TARGET_ARCH alone. No need to reverse engineer the compiler command line? > + > + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile > + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" > + if [ ! -f "${platform}" ] > + then > + echo "${platform} not found!" > + exit 1 > + fi > + > + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, but > + # they can't be used here > + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 > + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ > + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ > + --output-file="${out_file}" \ > + --platform=${platform} > + > + if [ "${CPPCHECK_HTML}" = "y" ] > + then > + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, > + # but they can't be used here > + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 > + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ > + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ > + --output-file="${out_file%.txt}.xml" \ > + --platform=${platform} \ > + -q \ > + --xml This is showing my ignorance in cppcheck, but does it actually need to be called twice in the html generation case? Actually three times if we count the extra cppcheck-htmlreport call? > + fi > + fi > +fi > diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..3aefa7ba5c98 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > +<?xml version="1.0"?> > +<platform> > + <char_bit>8</char_bit> > + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> usually in C the default is actually "signed" not "unsigned". If you write: int i; i is signed > + <sizeof> > + <short>2</short> > + <int>4</int> > + <long>4</long> > + <long-long>8</long-long> > + <float>4</float> > + <double>8</double> > + <long-double>8</long-double> > + <pointer>4</pointer> > + <size_t>4</size_t> > + <wchar_t>4</wchar_t> > + </sizeof> > +</platform> > diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..e345b934a986 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > +<?xml version="1.0"?> > +<platform> > + <char_bit>8</char_bit> > + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> > + <sizeof> > + <short>2</short> > + <int>4</int> > + <long>8</long> > + <long-long>8</long-long> > + <float>4</float> > + <double>8</double> > + <long-double>16</long-double> > + <pointer>8</pointer> > + <size_t>4</size_t> Isn't size_t 8 bytes on arm64? > + <wchar_t>2</wchar_t> > + </sizeof> > +</platform>
Hi Stefano, > I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and > xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is > no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is > "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. Ok I will split these changes in a following patch > > Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: > - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already reviewed? >> >> + >> +def generate_cppcheck_deps(): >> + global cppcheck_extra_make_args >> + >> + # Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: >> + # - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. >> + # - define CPPCHECK as we use it to disable or enable some specific part of >> + # the code to solve some cppcheck issues. >> + # - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" >> + # which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check >> + # file per file. >> + # - Explicitly suppress warnings on compiler-def.h because cppcheck throws >> + # an unmatchedSuppression due to the rule we put in suppression-list.txt >> + # to skip every finding in the file. >> + # >> + # Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h >> + # >> + cppcheck_flags=""" >> +--cppcheck-build-dir={}/{} >> + --max-ctu-depth=10 >> + --enable=style,information,missingInclude >> + --template=\'{{file}}({{line}},{{column}}):{{id}}:{{severity}}:{{message}}\' >> + --relative-paths={} >> + --inline-suppr >> + --suppressions-list={}/suppression-list.txt >> + --suppress='unmatchedSuppression:*generated/compiler-def.h' >> + --include={}/include/xen/config.h > > I noticed that some of the includes we used to have like > xsm/flask/include are missing here. Is that intended? Yes it is, now that cppcheck is using the JSON compilation database, it can understand by the compilation argument “-I” what include path it needs to add, before we were adding it to every file, resulting in some false positive from the tool. Just --include={}/include/xen/config.h is needed because in the Xen makefile we are doing the same, passing the option to the compiler, resulting in every compiled file to have that header included. >> >> + case ${OPTION} in >> + -h|--help) >> + help >> + exit 0 >> + ;; >> + --compiler=*) >> + COMPILER="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > > This can be: > > COMPILER="${OPTION#*=}" > > and same for all the other below Ok I’ll fix that > > >> + sm_tool_args="n" >> + ;; >> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) >> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >> + sm_tool_args="y" >> + ;; >> + --cppcheck-html) >> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" >> + sm_tool_args="n" >> + ;; >> + --cppcheck-plat=*) >> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >> + sm_tool_args="n" >> + ;; >> + --ignore-path=*) >> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >> + sm_tool_args="n" >> + ;; >> + --) >> + forward_to_cc="y" >> + sm_tool_args="n" >> + ;; >> + *) >> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then >> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" >> + else >> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" >> + exit 1 > > It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to > 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set > CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing > something? We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. > > >> + fi >> + ;; >> + esac >> +done >> + >> +if [ "${COMPILER}" = "" ] >> +then >> + echo "--compiler arg is mandatory." >> + exit 1 >> +fi >> + >> +function print_file() { >> + local text="${1}" >> + local init_file="${2}" >> + >> + if [ "${init_file}" = "y" ] >> + then >> + echo -e -n "${text}" > "${JDB_FILE}" >> + else >> + echo -e -n "${text}" >> "${JDB_FILE}" >> + fi > > The >> can be used to create a file if the file is not already present. > So why the need for this if? In fact, we don't need print_file at all > and we can just > > echo -e -n "something" >> "${JDB_FILE}" > > directly from create_jcd. If you are concerned about a preexisting file, > then at the beginning of create_jcd you can: > > rm "${JDB_FILE}" Ok I’ll remove the file in the top of create_jcd and use echo -e -n "something" >> "${JDB_FILE}” >> >> + >> + # Check wchar size >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" >> + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one >> + # applied to the file by the compiler >> + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ >> + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') >> + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] >> + then >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" >> + fi > > This seems a bit unnecessary: we should be able to find the right > platform file from XEN_TARGET_ARCH alone. No need to reverse engineer > the compiler command line? The efi code is compiled with -fshort-wchar, but the rest of the file uses default length wchar, now maybe it was a bit of overthinking because I guess we have only these cases: arm64: arm64-wchar_t2 (efi code uses -fshort-wchar) arm32: arm32-wchar_t4 (efi code is not in, but common-stub compiled with -f-no-short-wchar) x86_64: x86_64-wchar_t2 (efi code uses -fshort-wchar) Am I right? > > >> + >> + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile >> + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" >> + if [ ! -f "${platform}" ] >> + then >> + echo "${platform} not found!" >> + exit 1 >> + fi >> + >> + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, but >> + # they can't be used here >> + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 >> + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ >> + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ >> + --output-file="${out_file}" \ >> + --platform=${platform} >> + >> + if [ "${CPPCHECK_HTML}" = "y" ] >> + then >> + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, >> + # but they can't be used here >> + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 >> + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ >> + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ >> + --output-file="${out_file%.txt}.xml" \ >> + --platform=${platform} \ >> + -q \ >> + --xml > > This is showing my ignorance in cppcheck, but does it actually need to > be called twice in the html generation case? Actually three times if we > count the extra cppcheck-htmlreport call? Cppcheck is not able to output a text report and an XML report at the same time, hence we need to call it twice, but the second call will use the cppcheck build directory As a “cache” to generate the results so it will be much more faster than the first one. > > >> + fi >> + fi >> +fi >> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..3aefa7ba5c98 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >> +<?xml version="1.0"?> >> +<platform> >> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> >> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> > > usually in C the default is actually "signed" not "unsigned". If you > write: > > int i; > > i is signed It took me a bit to understand this field, as the documentation is not clear at all, the default-sign is referring to the default char sign, which should be unsigned for arm, right? Here the code to cppcheck that clarifies the field: https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/blob/2.7.5/lib/platform.cpp At line 204, defaultSign is taking the value of <default-sign>, at line 64, when the platform is Native, defaultSign = (std::numeric_limits<char>::is_signed) ? 's' : 'u'; I’ve done some tests with this code in arm/arm64/x86_64: #define is_type_signed(my_type) (((my_type)-1) < 0) if (is_type_signed(char)) printf("signed\n"); else printf("unsigned\n"); And I have unsigned for arm/arm64 and signed for x86_64 (which I will change as it is wrong in this patch) Can you confirm my results are right? >> >> +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >> +<?xml version="1.0"?> >> +<platform> >> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> >> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> >> + <sizeof> >> + <short>2</short> >> + <int>4</int> >> + <long>8</long> >> + <long-long>8</long-long> >> + <float>4</float> >> + <double>8</double> >> + <long-double>16</long-double> >> + <pointer>8</pointer> >> + <size_t>4</size_t> > > Isn't size_t 8 bytes on arm64? Yes you are right, I will fix it > > >> + <wchar_t>2</wchar_t> >> + </sizeof> >> +</platform>
On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > > I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and > > xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is > > no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is > > "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. > > Ok I will split these changes in a following patch > > > > > Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: > > - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > > - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > > - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > > - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst > > Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before > this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already > reviewed? If Jan and the other reviewers are OK, I think you could split them out in a separate patch and add my reviewed-by. If Jan prefers to keep it all together in one patch, then I wrote it down so that I remember what I have already acked :-) > >> + > >> +def generate_cppcheck_deps(): > >> + global cppcheck_extra_make_args > >> + > >> + # Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: > >> + # - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. > >> + # - define CPPCHECK as we use it to disable or enable some specific part of > >> + # the code to solve some cppcheck issues. > >> + # - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" > >> + # which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check > >> + # file per file. > >> + # - Explicitly suppress warnings on compiler-def.h because cppcheck throws > >> + # an unmatchedSuppression due to the rule we put in suppression-list.txt > >> + # to skip every finding in the file. > >> + # > >> + # Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h > >> + # > >> + cppcheck_flags=""" > >> +--cppcheck-build-dir={}/{} > >> + --max-ctu-depth=10 > >> + --enable=style,information,missingInclude > >> + --template=\'{{file}}({{line}},{{column}}):{{id}}:{{severity}}:{{message}}\' > >> + --relative-paths={} > >> + --inline-suppr > >> + --suppressions-list={}/suppression-list.txt > >> + --suppress='unmatchedSuppression:*generated/compiler-def.h' > >> + --include={}/include/xen/config.h > > > > I noticed that some of the includes we used to have like > > xsm/flask/include are missing here. Is that intended? > > Yes it is, now that cppcheck is using the JSON compilation database, it can understand > by the compilation argument “-I” what include path it needs to add, before we were > adding it to every file, resulting in some false positive from the tool. > Just --include={}/include/xen/config.h is needed because in the Xen makefile we are doing > the same, passing the option to the compiler, resulting in every compiled file to have that > header included. OK, good to hear the process is improving > >> > >> + case ${OPTION} in > >> + -h|--help) > >> + help > >> + exit 0 > >> + ;; > >> + --compiler=*) > >> + COMPILER="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > > > > This can be: > > > > COMPILER="${OPTION#*=}" > > > > and same for all the other below > > Ok I’ll fix that > > > > > > >> + sm_tool_args="n" > >> + ;; > >> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) > >> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >> + sm_tool_args="y" > >> + ;; > >> + --cppcheck-html) > >> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" > >> + sm_tool_args="n" > >> + ;; > >> + --cppcheck-plat=*) > >> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >> + sm_tool_args="n" > >> + ;; > >> + --ignore-path=*) > >> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >> + sm_tool_args="n" > >> + ;; > >> + --) > >> + forward_to_cc="y" > >> + sm_tool_args="n" > >> + ;; > >> + *) > >> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then > >> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" > >> + else > >> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" > >> + exit 1 > > > > It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to > > 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set > > CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing > > something? > > We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where > when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments > passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS > until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. That seems a bit unnecessary: if the user wants to pass arguments to cppcheck, the user would do --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" with "" quotes. Doing that should make --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" be seen as a single argument from this script point of view. CPPCHECK_TOOL would end up being set to "cppcheck arg1 arg2" which is what we want anyway? And if we need to distinguish between the cppcheck binary and its argument we could use "cut" to extract "cppcheck", "arg1", and "arg2" from CPPCHECK_TOOL. Would that work? > > > >> + fi > >> + ;; > >> + esac > >> +done > >> + > >> +if [ "${COMPILER}" = "" ] > >> +then > >> + echo "--compiler arg is mandatory." > >> + exit 1 > >> +fi > >> + > >> +function print_file() { > >> + local text="${1}" > >> + local init_file="${2}" > >> + > >> + if [ "${init_file}" = "y" ] > >> + then > >> + echo -e -n "${text}" > "${JDB_FILE}" > >> + else > >> + echo -e -n "${text}" >> "${JDB_FILE}" > >> + fi > > > > The >> can be used to create a file if the file is not already present. > > So why the need for this if? In fact, we don't need print_file at all > > and we can just > > > > echo -e -n "something" >> "${JDB_FILE}" > > > > directly from create_jcd. If you are concerned about a preexisting file, > > then at the beginning of create_jcd you can: > > > > rm "${JDB_FILE}" > > Ok I’ll remove the file in the top of create_jcd and use echo -e -n "something" >> "${JDB_FILE}” > > >> > >> + > >> + # Check wchar size > >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" > >> + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one > >> + # applied to the file by the compiler > >> + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ > >> + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') > >> + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] > >> + then > >> + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" > >> + fi > > > > This seems a bit unnecessary: we should be able to find the right > > platform file from XEN_TARGET_ARCH alone. No need to reverse engineer > > the compiler command line? > > The efi code is compiled with -fshort-wchar, but the rest of the file uses default length wchar, > now maybe it was a bit of overthinking because I guess we have only these cases: > > arm64: arm64-wchar_t2 (efi code uses -fshort-wchar) > arm32: arm32-wchar_t4 (efi code is not in, but common-stub compiled with -f-no-short-wchar) > x86_64: x86_64-wchar_t2 (efi code uses -fshort-wchar) > > Am I right? Yes I think so too > > > >> + > >> + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile > >> + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" > >> + if [ ! -f "${platform}" ] > >> + then > >> + echo "${platform} not found!" > >> + exit 1 > >> + fi > >> + > >> + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, but > >> + # they can't be used here > >> + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 > >> + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ > >> + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ > >> + --output-file="${out_file}" \ > >> + --platform=${platform} > >> + > >> + if [ "${CPPCHECK_HTML}" = "y" ] > >> + then > >> + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, > >> + # but they can't be used here > >> + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 > >> + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ > >> + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ > >> + --output-file="${out_file%.txt}.xml" \ > >> + --platform=${platform} \ > >> + -q \ > >> + --xml > > > > This is showing my ignorance in cppcheck, but does it actually need to > > be called twice in the html generation case? Actually three times if we > > count the extra cppcheck-htmlreport call? > > Cppcheck is not able to output a text report and an XML report at the same time, > hence we need to call it twice, but the second call will use the cppcheck build directory > As a “cache” to generate the results so it will be much more faster than the first one. OK > > > >> + fi > >> + fi > >> +fi > >> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..3aefa7ba5c98 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml > >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > >> +<?xml version="1.0"?> > >> +<platform> > >> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> > >> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> > > > > usually in C the default is actually "signed" not "unsigned". If you > > write: > > > > int i; > > > > i is signed > > It took me a bit to understand this field, as the documentation is not clear at all, the default-sign is referring > to the default char sign, which should be unsigned for arm, right? OK > Here the code to cppcheck that clarifies the field: > > https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/blob/2.7.5/lib/platform.cpp > > At line 204, defaultSign is taking the value of <default-sign>, at line 64, when the platform is Native, > defaultSign = (std::numeric_limits<char>::is_signed) ? 's' : 'u'; > > I’ve done some tests with this code in arm/arm64/x86_64: > > #define is_type_signed(my_type) (((my_type)-1) < 0) > if (is_type_signed(char)) > printf("signed\n"); > else > printf("unsigned\n"); > > And I have unsigned for arm/arm64 and signed for x86_64 (which I will change as it is wrong in this patch) > > Can you confirm my results are right? It looks like this is compiler specific. Yes, surprisingly with gcc I got the same results as you.
On 30.11.2022 21:26, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and >>> xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is >>> no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is >>> "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. >> >> Ok I will split these changes in a following patch >> >>> >>> Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: >>> - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt >>> - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst >>> - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json >>> - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst >> >> Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before >> this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already >> reviewed? > > If Jan and the other reviewers are OK, I think you could split them out > in a separate patch and add my reviewed-by. If Jan prefers to keep it > all together in one patch, then I wrote it down so that I remember what > I have already acked :-) Docs changes being split off and going in first is okay as long as what is being documented is present behavior. If other changes are needed to make (parts of) new documentation actually correct, then it should imo go together. If new documentation describes future behavior (e.g. design docs), then of course it's fine as well to go in early, as then there simply is no code anywhere which this would (temporarily) not describe correctly. Jan
> On 1 Dec 2022, at 08:33, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > On 30.11.2022 21:26, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>>> I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and >>>> xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is >>>> no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is >>>> "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. >>> >>> Ok I will split these changes in a following patch >>> >>>> >>>> Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: >>>> - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt >>>> - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst >>>> - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json >>>> - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst >>> >>> Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before >>> this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already >>> reviewed? >> >> If Jan and the other reviewers are OK, I think you could split them out >> in a separate patch and add my reviewed-by. If Jan prefers to keep it >> all together in one patch, then I wrote it down so that I remember what >> I have already acked :-) > > Docs changes being split off and going in first is okay as long as what > is being documented is present behavior. If other changes are needed to > make (parts of) new documentation actually correct, then it should imo > go together. If new documentation describes future behavior (e.g. > design docs), then of course it's fine as well to go in early, as then > there simply is no code anywhere which this would (temporarily) not > describe correctly. Yeah I thought so, I would prefer to keep these files here otherwise I would need to change them somehow and I would lose the r-by anyway. Regarding the revert of cppcheck from makefile and xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py, are you ok if I send a patch with only those changes? Would it be ok for you if the new patch is after this one? Just asking to prevent back and forth. Thank you > > Jan
On 01.12.2022 12:18, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> On 1 Dec 2022, at 08:33, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: >> On 30.11.2022 21:26, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>>>> I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and >>>>> xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is >>>>> no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is >>>>> "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. >>>> >>>> Ok I will split these changes in a following patch >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: >>>>> - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt >>>>> - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst >>>>> - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json >>>>> - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst >>>> >>>> Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before >>>> this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already >>>> reviewed? >>> >>> If Jan and the other reviewers are OK, I think you could split them out >>> in a separate patch and add my reviewed-by. If Jan prefers to keep it >>> all together in one patch, then I wrote it down so that I remember what >>> I have already acked :-) >> >> Docs changes being split off and going in first is okay as long as what >> is being documented is present behavior. If other changes are needed to >> make (parts of) new documentation actually correct, then it should imo >> go together. If new documentation describes future behavior (e.g. >> design docs), then of course it's fine as well to go in early, as then >> there simply is no code anywhere which this would (temporarily) not >> describe correctly. > > Yeah I thought so, I would prefer to keep these files here otherwise I would need to > change them somehow and I would lose the r-by anyway. > > Regarding the revert of cppcheck from makefile and xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py, > are you ok if I send a patch with only those changes? Would it be ok for you if the new patch > is after this one? I don't mind you doing so, but I guess the question is mainly to people actually / possibly making use of those make goals. Jan
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 01.12.2022 12:18, Luca Fancellu wrote: > >> On 1 Dec 2022, at 08:33, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >> On 30.11.2022 21:26, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > >>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > >>>>> I think the revert of the cppcheck integration in xen/Makefile and > >>>>> xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py could be a separate patch. There is > >>>>> no need to make sure cppcheck support in the xen Makefile is > >>>>> "bisectable". That patch could have my acked-by already. > >>>> > >>>> Ok I will split these changes in a following patch > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Also the document changes introduced in this patch have my reviewed-by: > >>>>> - docs/misra/cppcheck.txt > >>>>> - docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst > >>>>> - docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json > >>>>> - docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst > >>>> > >>>> Thank you, should I put those files in a separate patch with your rev-by before > >>>> this patch or this is just a comment for you to remember which file you already > >>>> reviewed? > >>> > >>> If Jan and the other reviewers are OK, I think you could split them out > >>> in a separate patch and add my reviewed-by. If Jan prefers to keep it > >>> all together in one patch, then I wrote it down so that I remember what > >>> I have already acked :-) > >> > >> Docs changes being split off and going in first is okay as long as what > >> is being documented is present behavior. If other changes are needed to > >> make (parts of) new documentation actually correct, then it should imo > >> go together. If new documentation describes future behavior (e.g. > >> design docs), then of course it's fine as well to go in early, as then > >> there simply is no code anywhere which this would (temporarily) not > >> describe correctly. > > > > Yeah I thought so, I would prefer to keep these files here otherwise I would need to > > change them somehow and I would lose the r-by anyway. > > > > Regarding the revert of cppcheck from makefile and xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py, > > are you ok if I send a patch with only those changes? Would it be ok for you if the new patch > > is after this one? > > I don't mind you doing so, but I guess the question is mainly to people > actually / possibly making use of those make goals. I think it is OK -- we are not at the stage where cppcheck is used in production-worthy pipelines yet.
Hi Stefano, >>> >>> >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>> + ;; >>>> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) >>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>> + sm_tool_args="y" >>>> + ;; >>>> + --cppcheck-html) >>>> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>> + ;; >>>> + --cppcheck-plat=*) >>>> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>> + ;; >>>> + --ignore-path=*) >>>> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>> + ;; >>>> + --) >>>> + forward_to_cc="y" >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>> + ;; >>>> + *) >>>> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then >>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" >>>> + else >>>> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" >>>> + exit 1 >>> >>> It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to >>> 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set >>> CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing >>> something? >> >> We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where >> when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments >> passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS >> until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. > > That seems a bit unnecessary: if the user wants to pass arguments to > cppcheck, the user would do --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" with "" > quotes. Doing that should make --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" be > seen as a single argument from this script point of view. CPPCHECK_TOOL > would end up being set to "cppcheck arg1 arg2" which is what we want > anyway? And if we need to distinguish between the cppcheck binary and > its argument we could use "cut" to extract "cppcheck", "arg1", and > "arg2" from CPPCHECK_TOOL. Would that work? > I gave a try for the quotes, the problem is that we need to have quotes in CC=“...”, so adding quotes also to --cppcheck-cmd= which is inside CC=“...” is preventing the Makefile to work, I tried escaping etc but I didn’t manage to have it working, so would you agree on keeping it like that?
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > >>> > >>> > >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) > >>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>> + sm_tool_args="y" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + --cppcheck-html) > >>>> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" > >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + --cppcheck-plat=*) > >>>> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + --ignore-path=*) > >>>> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + --) > >>>> + forward_to_cc="y" > >>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>> + ;; > >>>> + *) > >>>> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then > >>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" > >>>> + else > >>>> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" > >>>> + exit 1 > >>> > >>> It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to > >>> 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set > >>> CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing > >>> something? > >> > >> We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where > >> when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments > >> passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS > >> until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. > > > > That seems a bit unnecessary: if the user wants to pass arguments to > > cppcheck, the user would do --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" with "" > > quotes. Doing that should make --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" be > > seen as a single argument from this script point of view. CPPCHECK_TOOL > > would end up being set to "cppcheck arg1 arg2" which is what we want > > anyway? And if we need to distinguish between the cppcheck binary and > > its argument we could use "cut" to extract "cppcheck", "arg1", and > > "arg2" from CPPCHECK_TOOL. Would that work? > > > > I gave a try for the quotes, the problem is that we need to have quotes in CC=“...”, so adding > quotes also to --cppcheck-cmd= which is inside CC=“...” is preventing the Makefile to work, > I tried escaping etc but I didn’t manage to have it working, so would you agree on keeping it > like that? Is the problem coming from the following? cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd={} {} --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, cppcheck_flags, settings.tools_dir) if settings.cppcheck_html: cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( settings.tools_dir, cppcheck_cc_flags ).replace("\n", "") Wouldn't something like the following solve the issue? settings.cppcheck_binpath = settings.cppcheck_binpath + " " + cppcheck_cc_flags cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd=\"{}\" --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, settings.tools_dir) if settings.cppcheck_html: cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( settings.tools_dir, cppcheck_cc_flags ).replace("\n", "")
> On 1 Dec 2022, at 20:23, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> Hi Stefano, >> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="y" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + --cppcheck-html) >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + --cppcheck-plat=*) >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + --ignore-path=*) >>>>>> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + --) >>>>>> + forward_to_cc="y" >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" >>>>>> + ;; >>>>>> + *) >>>>>> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" >>>>>> + else >>>>>> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" >>>>>> + exit 1 >>>>> >>>>> It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to >>>>> 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set >>>>> CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing >>>>> something? >>>> >>>> We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where >>>> when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments >>>> passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS >>>> until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. >>> >>> That seems a bit unnecessary: if the user wants to pass arguments to >>> cppcheck, the user would do --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" with "" >>> quotes. Doing that should make --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" be >>> seen as a single argument from this script point of view. CPPCHECK_TOOL >>> would end up being set to "cppcheck arg1 arg2" which is what we want >>> anyway? And if we need to distinguish between the cppcheck binary and >>> its argument we could use "cut" to extract "cppcheck", "arg1", and >>> "arg2" from CPPCHECK_TOOL. Would that work? >>> >> >> I gave a try for the quotes, the problem is that we need to have quotes in CC=“...”, so adding >> quotes also to --cppcheck-cmd= which is inside CC=“...” is preventing the Makefile to work, >> I tried escaping etc but I didn’t manage to have it working, so would you agree on keeping it >> like that? > > Is the problem coming from the following? > > cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd={} {} > --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ > """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, cppcheck_flags, > settings.tools_dir) > > if settings.cppcheck_html: > cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" > > # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC > cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( > settings.tools_dir, > cppcheck_cc_flags > ).replace("\n", "") > > > Wouldn't something like the following solve the issue? > > settings.cppcheck_binpath = settings.cppcheck_binpath + " " + cppcheck_cc_flags > > cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd=\"{}\" > --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ > """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, settings.tools_dir) > > if settings.cppcheck_html: > cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" > > # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC > cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( > settings.tools_dir, > cppcheck_cc_flags > ).replace("\n", "") No unfortunately not, Makefile is very sensitive to quotes, I’ve tried with many combination of single/double quotes but nothing worked
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > > On 1 Dec 2022, at 20:23, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote: > >> Hi Stefano, > >> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + --cppcheck-cmd=*) > >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="y" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + --cppcheck-html) > >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + --cppcheck-plat=*) > >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + --ignore-path=*) > >>>>>> + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + --) > >>>>>> + forward_to_cc="y" > >>>>>> + sm_tool_args="n" > >>>>>> + ;; > >>>>>> + *) > >>>>>> + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then > >>>>>> + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" > >>>>>> + else > >>>>>> + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" > >>>>>> + exit 1 > >>>>> > >>>>> It doesn't look like sm_tool_args is really needed? It is only set to > >>>>> 'y' in the case of --cppcheck-cmd, and in that case we also set > >>>>> CPPCHECK_TOOL. CPPCHECK_TOOL is the variable used below. Am I missing > >>>>> something? > >>>> > >>>> We use sm_tool_args to fill CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, basically it’s a state machine where > >>>> when we find --cppcheck-cmd=<xxx> we expect that every other space separated arguments > >>>> passed afterwards are the args for cppcheck, so we append to CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS > >>>> until we find an argument that is supposed to be only for this script. > >>> > >>> That seems a bit unnecessary: if the user wants to pass arguments to > >>> cppcheck, the user would do --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" with "" > >>> quotes. Doing that should make --cppcheck-cmd="cppcheck arg1 arg2" be > >>> seen as a single argument from this script point of view. CPPCHECK_TOOL > >>> would end up being set to "cppcheck arg1 arg2" which is what we want > >>> anyway? And if we need to distinguish between the cppcheck binary and > >>> its argument we could use "cut" to extract "cppcheck", "arg1", and > >>> "arg2" from CPPCHECK_TOOL. Would that work? > >>> > >> > >> I gave a try for the quotes, the problem is that we need to have quotes in CC=“...”, so adding > >> quotes also to --cppcheck-cmd= which is inside CC=“...” is preventing the Makefile to work, > >> I tried escaping etc but I didn’t manage to have it working, so would you agree on keeping it > >> like that? > > > > Is the problem coming from the following? > > > > cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd={} {} > > --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ > > """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, cppcheck_flags, > > settings.tools_dir) > > > > if settings.cppcheck_html: > > cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" > > > > # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC > > cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( > > settings.tools_dir, > > cppcheck_cc_flags > > ).replace("\n", "") > > > > > > Wouldn't something like the following solve the issue? > > > > settings.cppcheck_binpath = settings.cppcheck_binpath + " " + cppcheck_cc_flags > > > > cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd=\"{}\" > > --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ > > """.format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, settings.tools_dir) > > > > if settings.cppcheck_html: > > cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" > > > > # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC > > cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( > > settings.tools_dir, > > cppcheck_cc_flags > > ).replace("\n", "") > > No unfortunately not, Makefile is very sensitive to quotes, I’ve tried with many combination of single/double quotes but nothing worked I spent a couple of hours to try to get it to work. I also admit defeat. Keep your original code, that's better.
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index f5a66f6194dd..68566d0c2587 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -7,9 +7,11 @@ *.o *.d *.d2 -*.c.cppcheck +*.cppcheck.txt +*.cppcheck.xml *.opic *.a +*.c.json *.safparse *.so *.so.[0-9]* @@ -282,9 +284,11 @@ xen/arch/*/efi/efi.h xen/arch/*/efi/pe.c xen/arch/*/efi/runtime.c xen/arch/*/include/asm/asm-offsets.h +xen/build-dir-cppcheck/ xen/common/config_data.S xen/common/config.gz xen/cppcheck-htmlreport/ +xen/cppcheck-report/ xen/cppcheck-misra.* xen/include/headers*.chk xen/include/compat/* @@ -315,7 +319,7 @@ xen/xsm/flask/xenpolicy-* tools/flask/policy/policy.conf tools/flask/policy/xenpolicy-* xen/xen -xen/xen-cppcheck.xml +xen/suppression-list.txt xen/xen-syms xen/xen-syms.map xen/xen.* diff --git a/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt b/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt index 25d8c3050b72..f7b9f678b4d5 100644 --- a/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt +++ b/docs/misra/cppcheck.txt @@ -3,8 +3,7 @@ Cppcheck for Xen static and MISRA analysis Xen can be analysed for both static analysis problems and MISRA violation using cppcheck, the open source tool allows the creation of a report with all the -findings. Xen has introduced the support in the Makefile so it's very easy to -use and in this document we can see how. +findings. The minimum version required for cppcheck is 2.7. Note that at the time of writing (June 2022), the version 2.8 is known to be broken [1]. @@ -38,27 +37,7 @@ Dependencies are listed in the readme.md of the project repository. Use cppcheck to analyse Xen =========================== -Using cppcheck integration is very simple, it requires few steps: - - 1) Compile Xen - 2) call the cppcheck make target to generate a report in xml format: - make CPPCHECK_MISRA=y cppcheck - 3) call the cppcheck-html make target to generate a report in xml and html - format: - make CPPCHECK_MISRA=y cppcheck-html - - In case the cppcheck binaries are not in the PATH, CPPCHECK and - CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT variables can be overridden with the full path to the - binaries: - - make -C xen \ - CPPCHECK=/path/to/cppcheck \ - CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT=/path/to/cppcheck-htmlreport \ - CPPCHECK_MISRA=y \ - cppcheck-html - -The output is by default in a folder named cppcheck-htmlreport, but the name -can be changed by passing it in the CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR variable. - +To analyse Xen using cppcheck, please refer to the document +xen-static-analysis.rst, section "Analyse Xen with Cppcheck". [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/cppcheck/discussion/general/thread/bfc3ab6c41/?limit=25 diff --git a/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst b/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst index 1d23447556d2..31dafd5d4ece 100644 --- a/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst +++ b/docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ Here is an example to add a new justification in safe.json:: | { | "id": "SAF-0-safe", | "analyser": { +| "cppcheck": "misra-c2012-20.7", | "coverity": "misra_c_2012_rule_20_7_violation", | "eclair": "MC3R1.R20.7" | }, @@ -77,9 +78,9 @@ Here is an explanation of the fields inside an object of the "content" array: It tells the tool to substitute a Xen in-code comment having this structure: /* SAF-0-safe [...] \*/ - analyser: it is an object containing pair of key-value strings, the key is - the analyser, so it can be coverity or eclair, the value is the proprietary - id corresponding on the finding, for example when coverity is used as - analyser, the tool will translate the Xen in-code coment in this way: + the analyser, so it can be cppcheck, coverity or eclair, the value is the + proprietary id corresponding on the finding, for example when coverity is + used as analyser, the tool will translate the Xen in-code coment in this way: /* SAF-0-safe [...] \*/ -> /* coverity[misra_c_2012_rule_20_7_violation] \*/ if the object doesn't have a key-value, then the corresponding in-code comment won't be translated. diff --git a/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json b/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..5d4da2ce6170 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +{ + "version": "1.0", + "content": [ + { + "id": "SAF-0-false-positive-cppcheck", + "violation-id": "", + "tool-version": "", + "name": "Sentinel", + "text": "Next ID to be used" + } + ] +} diff --git a/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst b/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst index 5b886474d4a0..2712255db1b0 100644 --- a/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst +++ b/docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst @@ -7,9 +7,8 @@ The Xen codebase integrates some scripts and tools that helps the developer to perform static analysis of the code, currently Xen supports three analysis tool that are eclair, coverity and cppcheck. The Xen tree has a script (xen-analysis.py) available to ease the analysis -process and it integrates a way to suppress findings on these tools (only Eclair -and Coverity are currently supported by the script), please check the -documenting-violation.rst document to know more about it. +process and it integrates a way to suppress findings on these tools, please +check the documenting-violation.rst document to know more about it. Analyse Xen with Coverity or Eclair ----------------------------------- @@ -52,3 +51,40 @@ When invoking the script, the procedure below will be followed: this step, call the script adding the --no-clean argument, but before running again the script, call it with the --clean-only argument, that will execute only this cleaning step. + + +Analyse Xen with Cppcheck +------------------------- + +Cppcheck tool is integrated in xen-analysis.py script, when using the script, +the tool will be called on every source file compiled by the make build system. +Here how to start the analysis with Cppcheck: + + - xen-analysis.py --run-cppcheck [--cppcheck-misra] [--cppcheck-html] -- + [optional make arguments] + +The command above tells the script to prepare the codebase and use Cppcheck tool +for the analysis. +The optional argument --cppcheck-misra activates the analysis also for MISRA +compliance. +The optional argument --cppcheck-html instruct cppcheck to produce an additional +HTML report. + +When invoking the script for Cppcheck analysis, the followed procedure is +similar to the one above for Coverity or Eclair, but it has some additional +steps: + + 1. This step is the same as step 1 for Coverity/Eclair. + 2. The cppcheck dependency are created, build directory for cppcheck analysis + and an header file containing internal compiler macro + (include/generated/compiler-def.h) are generated + 3. Xen compilation starts using every <additional make parameters> supplied + at the script invocation, but because cppcheck is not able to intercept the + compiled files and flags on compiler invocation, a script (cppcheck-cc.sh) + is passed as CC to the make system, it is a wrapper for the compiler that + will also execute cppcheck on every compiled file. + 4. After the compilation and analysis, the cppcheck report will be created + putting together all the cppcheck report fragments for every analysed file. + Cppcheck will produce a text fragment and an additional XML report fragment + if the script is configured to produce the HTML output. + 5. This step is the same as step 3 for Coverity/Eclair. diff --git a/xen/Makefile b/xen/Makefile index 9d0df5e2c543..77926724bcd7 100644 --- a/xen/Makefile +++ b/xen/Makefile @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ endif # need-config __all: build -main-targets := build install uninstall clean distclean MAP cppcheck cppcheck-html +main-targets := build install uninstall clean distclean MAP .PHONY: $(main-targets) ifneq ($(XEN_TARGET_ARCH),x86_32) $(main-targets): %: _% ; @@ -566,18 +566,16 @@ _clean: $(Q)$(MAKE) $(clean)=tools/kconfig find . \( -name "*.o" -o -name ".*.d" -o -name ".*.d2" \ -o -name ".*.o.tmp" -o -name "*~" -o -name "core" \ - -o -name '*.lex.c' -o -name '*.tab.[ch]' -o -name '*.c.cppcheck' \ - -o -name "*.gcno" -o -name ".*.cmd" -o -name "lib.a" \) -exec rm -f {} \; + -o -name '*.lex.c' -o -name '*.tab.[ch]' -o -name "*.gcno" \ + -o -name ".*.cmd" -o -name "lib.a" \) -exec rm -f {} \; rm -f include/asm $(TARGET) $(TARGET).gz $(TARGET)-syms $(TARGET)-syms.map rm -f $(TARGET).efi $(TARGET).efi.map $(TARGET).efi.stripped rm -f asm-offsets.s arch/*/include/asm/asm-offsets.h rm -f .banner .allconfig.tmp include/xen/compile.h - rm -f cppcheck-misra.* xen-cppcheck.xml .PHONY: _distclean _distclean: clean rm -f tags TAGS cscope.files cscope.in.out cscope.out cscope.po.out GTAGS GPATH GRTAGS GSYMS .config source - rm -rf $(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) $(TARGET).gz: $(TARGET) gzip -n -f -9 < $< > $@.new @@ -651,111 +649,9 @@ cloc: done; \ done | cloc --list-file=- -# What cppcheck command to use. -# To get proper results, it is recommended to build cppcheck manually from the -# latest source and use CPPCHECK to give the full path to the built version. -CPPCHECK ?= cppcheck - -# What cppcheck-htmlreport to use. -# If you give the full path to a self compiled cppcheck, this should be set -# to the full path to cppcheck-html in the htmlreport directory of cppcheck. -# On recent distribution, this is available in the standard path. -CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT ?= cppcheck-htmlreport - -# By default we generate the report in cppcheck-htmlreport directory in the -# build directory. This can be changed by giving a directory in this variable. -CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR ?= cppcheck-htmlreport - -# By default we do not check misra rules, to enable pass "CPPCHECK_MISRA=y" to -# make command line. -CPPCHECK_MISRA ?= n - -# Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: -# - include directories and defines Xen Makefile is passing (from CFLAGS) -# - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. -# - define CPPCHECK as we use to disable or enable some specific part of the -# code to solve some cppcheck issues. -# - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" -# which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check file -# per file. -# -# Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h -# -CPPCHECKFLAGS := -DCPPCHECK --max-ctu-depth=10 \ - --enable=style,information,missingInclude \ - --include=$(srctree)/include/xen/config.h \ - -I $(srctree)/xsm/flask/include \ - -I $(srctree)/include/xen/libfdt \ - $(filter -D% -I%,$(CFLAGS)) - -# We need to find all C files (as we are not checking assembly files) so -# we find all generated .o files which have a .c corresponding file. -CPPCHECKFILES := $(wildcard $(patsubst $(objtree)/%.o,$(srctree)/%.c, \ - $(filter-out $(objtree)/tools/%, \ - $(shell find $(objtree) -name "*.o")))) - -# Headers and files required to run cppcheck on a file -CPPCHECKDEPS := $(objtree)/include/generated/autoconf.h \ - $(objtree)/include/generated/compiler-def.h - -ifeq ($(CPPCHECK_MISRA),y) - CPPCHECKFLAGS += --addon=cppcheck-misra.json - CPPCHECKDEPS += cppcheck-misra.json -endif - -quiet_cmd_cppcheck_xml = CPPCHECK $(patsubst $(srctree)/%,%,$<) -cmd_cppcheck_xml = $(CPPCHECK) -v -q --xml $(CPPCHECKFLAGS) \ - --output-file=$@ $< - -quiet_cmd_merge_cppcheck_reports = CPPCHECK-MERGE $@ -cmd_merge_cppcheck_reports = $(PYTHON) $(srctree)/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py $^ $@ - -quiet_cmd_cppcheck_html = CPPCHECK-HTML $< -cmd_cppcheck_html = $(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT) --file=$< --source-dir=$(srctree) \ - --report-dir=$(CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) --title=Xen - -PHONY += _cppcheck _cppcheck-html cppcheck-version - -_cppcheck-html: xen-cppcheck.xml - $(call if_changed,cppcheck_html) - -_cppcheck: xen-cppcheck.xml - -xen-cppcheck.xml: $(patsubst $(srctree)/%.c,$(objtree)/%.c.cppcheck,$(CPPCHECKFILES)) -ifeq ($(CPPCHECKFILES),) - $(error Please build Xen before running cppcheck) -endif - $(call if_changed,merge_cppcheck_reports) - -$(objtree)/%.c.cppcheck: $(srctree)/%.c $(CPPCHECKDEPS) | cppcheck-version - $(call if_changed,cppcheck_xml) - -cppcheck-version: - $(Q)if ! which $(CPPCHECK) > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ - echo "Cannot find cppcheck executable: $(CPPCHECK)"; \ - exit 1; \ - fi - $(Q)if [ "$$($(CPPCHECK) --version | awk '{print ($$2 < 2.7)}')" -eq 1 ]; then \ - echo "Please upgrade your cppcheck to version 2.7 or greater"; \ - exit 1; \ - fi - -# List of Misra rules to respect is written inside a doc. -# In order to have some helpful text in the cppcheck output, generate a text -# file containing the rules identifier, classification and text from the Xen -# documentation file. Also generate a json file with the right arguments for -# cppcheck in json format including the list of rules to ignore. -# -# convert_misra_doc.py, producing both targets at the same time, should be -# executed only once. Utilize a pattern rule to achieve this effect, with the -# stem kind of arbitrarily chosen to be "cppcheck". -.PRECIOUS: %-misra.json -%-misra.txt %-misra.json: $(XEN_ROOT)/docs/misra/rules.rst $(srctree)/tools/convert_misra_doc.py - $(Q)$(PYTHON) $(srctree)/tools/convert_misra_doc.py -i $< -o $*-misra.txt -j $*-misra.json - -# Put this in generated headers this way it is cleaned by include/Makefile -$(objtree)/include/generated/compiler-def.h: - $(Q)$(CC) -dM -E -o $@ - < /dev/null +# Target used by xen-analysis.sh script to retrieve Xen build system variables +export-variable-%: + $(info $*=$($*)) endif #config-build endif # need-sub-make diff --git a/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c b/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c index 45b6f969d2ab..3d1eb7f04a73 100644 --- a/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c +++ b/xen/include/hypercall-defs.c @@ -60,6 +60,13 @@ * are possible. */ +/* + * Cppcheck thinks this file needs to be analysed because it is preprocessed by + * the compiler, but it gets confused because this file does not contains C + * code. Hence protect the code when CPPCHECK is used. + */ +#ifndef CPPCHECK + #ifdef CONFIG_HVM #define PREFIX_hvm hvm #else @@ -286,3 +293,5 @@ mca do do - - - #ifndef CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE paging_domctl_cont do do do do - #endif + +#endif /* !CPPCHECK */ diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py index b5d9ef1862c9..8e50c27cd898 100755 --- a/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py +++ b/xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py @@ -1,28 +1,42 @@ #!/usr/bin/env python3 import sys -from xen_analysis import settings, generic_analysis +from xen_analysis import settings, generic_analysis, cppcheck_analysis from xen_analysis.generic_analysis import * +from xen_analysis.cppcheck_analysis import * + +PhaseExceptions = (GetMakeVarsPhaseError, ParseTagPhaseError, + CppcheckDepsPhaseError, BuildPhaseError, + CppcheckReportPhaseError) def main(argv): ret_code = 0 settings.parse_commandline(argv) try: + if settings.step_get_make_vars: + cppcheck_analysis.get_make_vars() if settings.step_parse_tags: generic_analysis.parse_xen_tags() + if settings.step_cppcheck_deps: + cppcheck_analysis.generate_cppcheck_deps() if settings.step_build_xen: generic_analysis.build_xen() - except (ParseTagPhaseError, BuildPhaseError) as e: + if settings.step_cppcheck_report: + cppcheck_analysis.generate_cppcheck_report() + except PhaseExceptions as e: print("ERROR: {}".format(e)) if hasattr(e, "errorcode"): ret_code = e.errorcode finally: if settings.step_clean_analysis: + cppcheck_analysis.clean_analysis_artifacts() e = generic_analysis.clean_analysis_artifacts() if e: print("ERROR: {}".format(e)) ret_code = 1 + if settings.step_distclean_analysis: + cppcheck_analysis.clean_reports() sys.exit(ret_code) diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..e5c2f3be3e85 --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env python3 + +import os, re, shutil +from . import settings, utils, cppcheck_report_utils + +class GetMakeVarsPhaseError(Exception): + pass + +class CppcheckDepsPhaseError(Exception): + pass + +class CppcheckReportPhaseError(Exception): + pass + +CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR = "build-dir-cppcheck" +CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-htmlreport" +CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR = "cppcheck-report" +cppcheck_extra_make_args = "" +xen_cc = "" + +def get_make_vars(): + global xen_cc + invoke_make = utils.invoke_command( + "make -C {} {} export-variable-CC" + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), + True, GetMakeVarsPhaseError, + "Error occured retrieving make vars:\n{}" + ) + + cc_var_regex = re.search('^CC=(.*)$', invoke_make, flags=re.M) + if cc_var_regex: + xen_cc = cc_var_regex.group(1) + + if xen_cc == "": + raise GetMakeVarsPhaseError("CC variable not found in Xen make output") + + +def __generate_suppression_list(out_file): + # The following lambda function will return a file if it contains lines with + # a comment containing "cppcheck-suppress[*]" on a single line. + grep_action = lambda x: utils.grep(x, + r'^[ \t]*/\* cppcheck-suppress\[(.*)\] \*/$') + # Look for a list of .h files that matches the condition above + headers = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.xen_dir, r'.*\.h$', + grep_action) + + try: + with open(out_file, "wt") as supplist_file: + # Add this rule to skip every finding in the autogenerated + # header for cppcheck + supplist_file.write("*:*generated/compiler-def.h\n") + + for entry in headers: + filename = entry["file"] + try: + with open(filename, "rt") as infile: + header_content = infile.readlines() + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( + "Issue with reading file {}: {}" + .format(filename, e) + ) + header_lines_len = len(header_content) + # line_num in entry will be header_content[line_num-1], here we + # are going to search the first line after line_num that have + # anything different from comments or empty line, because the + # in-code comment suppression is related to that line then. + for line_num in entry["matches"]: + cppcheck_violation_id = "" + tmp_line = line_num + # look up to which line is referring the comment at + # line_num (which would be header_content[tmp_line-1]) + comment_section = False + while tmp_line < header_lines_len: + line = header_content[tmp_line] + # Matches a line with just optional spaces/tabs and the + # start of a comment '/*' + comment_line_starts = re.match('^[ \t]*/\*.*$', line) + # Matches a line with text and the end of a comment '*/' + comment_line_stops = re.match('^.*\*/$', line) + if (not comment_section) and comment_line_starts: + comment_section = True + if (len(line.strip()) != 0) and (not comment_section): + cppcheck_violation_id = entry["matches"][line_num][0] + break + if comment_section and comment_line_stops: + comment_section = False + tmp_line = tmp_line + 1 + + if cppcheck_violation_id == "": + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( + "Error matching cppcheck comment in {} at line {}." + .format(filename, line_num) + ) + # Write [error id]:[filename]:[line] + # tmp_line refers to the array index, so translated to the + # file line (that begins with 1) it is tmp_line+1 + supplist_file.write( + "{}:{}:{}\n".format(cppcheck_violation_id, filename, + (tmp_line + 1)) + ) + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" + .format(out_file, e)) + + +def generate_cppcheck_deps(): + global cppcheck_extra_make_args + + # Compile flags to pass to cppcheck: + # - include config.h as this is passed directly to the compiler. + # - define CPPCHECK as we use it to disable or enable some specific part of + # the code to solve some cppcheck issues. + # - explicitely enable some cppcheck checks as we do not want to use "all" + # which includes unusedFunction which gives wrong positives as we check + # file per file. + # - Explicitly suppress warnings on compiler-def.h because cppcheck throws + # an unmatchedSuppression due to the rule we put in suppression-list.txt + # to skip every finding in the file. + # + # Compiler defines are in compiler-def.h which is included in config.h + # + cppcheck_flags=""" +--cppcheck-build-dir={}/{} + --max-ctu-depth=10 + --enable=style,information,missingInclude + --template=\'{{file}}({{line}},{{column}}):{{id}}:{{severity}}:{{message}}\' + --relative-paths={} + --inline-suppr + --suppressions-list={}/suppression-list.txt + --suppress='unmatchedSuppression:*generated/compiler-def.h' + --include={}/include/xen/config.h + -DCPPCHECK +""".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR, settings.xen_dir, + settings.outdir, settings.xen_dir) + + invoke_cppcheck = utils.invoke_command( + "{} --version".format(settings.cppcheck_binpath), + True, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, + "Error occured retrieving cppcheck version:\n{}\n\n{}" + ) + + version_regex = re.search('^Cppcheck (.*)$', invoke_cppcheck, flags=re.M) + # Currently, only cppcheck version >= 2.7 is supported, but version 2.8 is + # known to be broken, please refer to docs/misra/cppcheck.txt + if (not version_regex) or (version_regex.group(1) != "2.7"): + raise CppcheckDepsPhaseError( + "Can't find cppcheck version or version is not 2.7" + ) + + # If misra option is selected, append misra addon and generate cppcheck + # files for misra analysis + if settings.cppcheck_misra: + cppcheck_flags = cppcheck_flags + " --addon=cppcheck-misra.json" + + utils.invoke_command( + "{}/convert_misra_doc.py -i {}/docs/misra/rules.rst" + " -o {}/cppcheck-misra.txt -j {}/cppcheck-misra.json" + .format(settings.tools_dir, settings.repo_dir, + settings.outdir, settings.outdir), + False, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, + "An error occured when running:\n{}" + ) + + # Generate compiler macros + os.makedirs("{}/include/generated".format(settings.outdir), exist_ok=True) + utils.invoke_command( + "{} -dM -E -o \"{}/include/generated/compiler-def.h\" - < /dev/null" + .format(xen_cc, settings.outdir), + False, CppcheckDepsPhaseError, + "An error occured when running:\n{}" + ) + + # Generate cppcheck suppression list + __generate_suppression_list( + "{}/suppression-list.txt".format(settings.outdir)) + + # Generate cppcheck build folder + os.makedirs("{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR), + exist_ok=True) + + cppcheck_cc_flags = """--compiler={} --cppcheck-cmd={} {} + --cppcheck-plat={}/cppcheck-plat --ignore-path=tools/ +""".format(xen_cc, settings.cppcheck_binpath, cppcheck_flags, + settings.tools_dir) + + if settings.cppcheck_html: + cppcheck_cc_flags = cppcheck_cc_flags + " --cppcheck-html" + + # Generate the extra make argument to pass the cppcheck-cc.sh wrapper as CC + cppcheck_extra_make_args = "CC=\"{}/cppcheck-cc.sh {} --\"".format( + settings.tools_dir, + cppcheck_cc_flags + ).replace("\n", "") + + +def generate_cppcheck_report(): + # Prepare text report + # Look for a list of .cppcheck.txt files, those are the txt report + # fragments + fragments = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, r'.*\.cppcheck.txt$') + text_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, + CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR) + report_filename = "{}/xen-cppcheck.txt".format(text_report_dir) + os.makedirs(text_report_dir, exist_ok=True) + try: + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_merge_txt_fragments(fragments, + report_filename, + [settings.xen_dir]) + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckTXTReportError as e: + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) + + # If HTML output is requested + if settings.cppcheck_html: + # Look for a list of .cppcheck.xml files, those are the XML report + # fragments + fragments = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, + r'.*\.cppcheck.xml$') + html_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, + CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) + xml_filename = "{}/xen-cppcheck.xml".format(html_report_dir) + os.makedirs(html_report_dir, exist_ok=True) + try: + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_merge_xml_fragments(fragments, + xml_filename, + settings.xen_dir, + settings.outdir) + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckHTMLReportError as e: + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) + # Call cppcheck-htmlreport utility to generate the HTML output + utils.invoke_command( + "{} --file={} --source-dir={} --report-dir={}/html --title=Xen" + .format(settings.cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath, xml_filename, + settings.xen_dir, html_report_dir), + False, CppcheckReportPhaseError, + "Error occured generating Cppcheck HTML report:\n{}" + ) + # Strip src and obj path from *.html files + html_files = utils.recursive_find_file(html_report_dir, r'.*\.html$') + try: + cppcheck_report_utils.cppcheck_strip_path_html(html_files, + (settings.xen_dir, + settings.outdir)) + except cppcheck_report_utils.CppcheckHTMLReportError as e: + raise CppcheckReportPhaseError(e) + + +def clean_analysis_artifacts(): + clean_files = ("suppression-list.txt", "cppcheck-misra.txt", + "cppcheck-misra.json") + cppcheck_build_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, CPPCHECK_BUILD_DIR) + if os.path.isdir(cppcheck_build_dir): + shutil.rmtree(cppcheck_build_dir) + artifact_files = utils.recursive_find_file(settings.outdir, + r'.*\.(?:c\.json|cppcheck\.txt|cppcheck\.xml)$') + for file in clean_files: + file = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, file) + if os.path.isfile(file): + artifact_files.append(file) + for delfile in artifact_files: + os.remove(delfile) + + +def clean_reports(): + text_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, + CPPCHECK_REPORT_OUTDIR) + html_report_dir = "{}/{}".format(settings.outdir, + CPPCHECK_HTMLREPORT_OUTDIR) + if os.path.isdir(text_report_dir): + shutil.rmtree(text_report_dir) + if os.path.isdir(html_report_dir): + shutil.rmtree(html_report_dir) diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..02440aefdfec --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env python3 + +import os +from xml.etree import ElementTree + +class CppcheckHTMLReportError(Exception): + pass + +class CppcheckTXTReportError(Exception): + pass + + +def __elements_equal(el1, el2): + if type(el1) != type(el2): return False + + if el1.find('location') is None: return False + if el2.find('location') is None: return False + + el1_location = str(el1.find('location').attrib) + el2_location = str(el2.find('location').attrib) + + if el1_location != el2_location: return False + + return True + + +def __contain_element(new, lst): + for elem in lst: + if __elements_equal(new, elem): + return True + return False + + +def __get_xml_root_file(filename): + try: + result_xml_root = ElementTree.parse(filename).getroot() + except ElementTree.ParseError as e: + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError( + "XML parsing error in {}: {}".format(filename, e) + ) + return result_xml_root + + +def __sanitize_cppcheck_xml_path(xml_tree, src_path, obj_path): + # Some path are relative to the source tree but some others are generated + # in the obj tree, for cppcheck when using cppcheck-htmlreport we can pass + # only one source tree where the files will be fetched if relative path are + # found. So for every path that does not exists in src tree, we guess it + # comes from obj tree and we put explicit absolute path to it + error_item_root = xml_tree.findall("errors")[0] + for error_item in error_item_root: + for location_item in error_item.findall("location"): + path = location_item.attrib["file"] + new_obj_path = obj_path + "/" + path + new_src_path = src_path + "/" + path + if (path[0] != "/") and (not os.path.isfile(new_src_path)) \ + and os.path.isfile(new_obj_path): + location_item.attrib["file"] = new_obj_path + + +def cppcheck_merge_xml_fragments(fragments_list, out_xml_file, src_path, + obj_path): + + result_xml = __get_xml_root_file(fragments_list[0]) + insert_point = result_xml.findall("errors")[0] + for xml_file in fragments_list[1:]: + xml_root = __get_xml_root_file(xml_file) + curr_elem_list = list(insert_point) + new_elem_list = list(xml_root.findall("errors")[0]) + for xml_error_elem in new_elem_list: + if not __contain_element(xml_error_elem, curr_elem_list): + insert_point.insert(1, xml_error_elem) + + if result_xml is None: + return False + + __sanitize_cppcheck_xml_path(result_xml, src_path, obj_path) + + ElementTree.ElementTree(result_xml).write(out_xml_file) + + return True + + +def cppcheck_merge_txt_fragments(fragments_list, out_txt_file, strip_paths): + try: + with open(out_txt_file, "wt") as outfile: + # Using a set will remove automatically the duplicate lines + text_report_content = set() + for file in fragments_list: + try: + with open(file, "rt") as infile: + frag_lines = infile.readlines() + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckTXTReportError( + "Issue with reading file {}: {}" + .format(file, e) + ) + text_report_content.update(frag_lines) + + # Back to modifiable list + text_report_content = list(text_report_content) + # Strip path from report lines + for i in list(range(0, len(text_report_content))): + for path in strip_paths: + text_report_content[i] = text_report_content[i].replace( + path + "/", "") + # Write the final text report + outfile.writelines(text_report_content) + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckTXTReportError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" + .format(out_txt_file, e)) + + +def cppcheck_strip_path_html(html_files, strip_paths): + for file in html_files: + try: + with open(file, "rt") as infile: + html_lines = infile.readlines() + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError("Issue with reading file {}: {}" + .format(file, e)) + for i in list(range(0, len(html_lines))): + for path in strip_paths: + html_lines[i] = html_lines[i].replace(path + "/", "") + try: + with open(file, "wt") as outfile: + outfile.writelines(html_lines) + except OSError as e: + raise CppcheckHTMLReportError("Issue with writing file {}: {}" + .format(file, e)) diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py index 0b470c4ecf7d..94122aebace0 100644 --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ #!/usr/bin/env python3 -import os, subprocess -from . import settings, utils, tag_database +import os +from . import settings, utils, tag_database, cppcheck_analysis class ParseTagPhaseError(Exception): pass @@ -60,18 +60,13 @@ def parse_xen_tags(): def build_xen(): - try: - subprocess.run( - "make -C {} {} build" - .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args), - shell=True, check=True + utils.invoke_command( + "make -C {} {} {} build" + .format(settings.xen_dir, settings.make_forward_args, + cppcheck_analysis.cppcheck_extra_make_args), + False, BuildPhaseError, + "Build error occured when running:\n{}" ) - except (subprocess.CalledProcessError, subprocess.SubprocessError) as e: - excp = BuildPhaseError( - "Build error occured when running:\n{}".format(e.cmd) - ) - excp.errorcode = e.returncode if hasattr(e, 'returncode') else 1 - raise excp def clean_analysis_artifacts(): diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py index 947dfa2d50af..bd1faafe79a3 100644 --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py @@ -7,14 +7,23 @@ xen_dir = os.path.realpath(module_dir + "/../..") repo_dir = os.path.realpath(xen_dir + "/..") tools_dir = os.path.realpath(xen_dir + "/tools") +step_get_make_vars = False step_parse_tags = True +step_cppcheck_deps = False step_build_xen = True +step_cppcheck_report = False step_clean_analysis = True +step_distclean_analysis = False target_build = False target_clean = False +target_distclean = False analysis_tool = "" +cppcheck_binpath = "cppcheck" +cppcheck_html = False +cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath = "cppcheck-htmlreport" +cppcheck_misra = False make_forward_args = "" outdir = xen_dir @@ -26,29 +35,47 @@ Usage: {} [OPTION] ... [-- [make arguments]] This script runs the analysis on the Xen codebase. Options: - --build-only Run only the commands to build Xen with the optional make - arguments passed to the script - --clean-only Run only the commands to clean the analysis artifacts - -h, --help Print this help - --no-build Skip the build Xen phase - --no-clean Don\'t clean the analysis artifacts on exit - --run-coverity Run the analysis for the Coverity tool - --run-eclair Run the analysis for the Eclair tool + --build-only Run only the commands to build Xen with the optional + make arguments passed to the script + --clean-only Run only the commands to clean the analysis artifacts + --cppcheck-bin= Path to the cppcheck binary (Default: {}) + --cppcheck-html Produce an additional HTML output report for Cppcheck + --cppcheck-html-bin= Path to the cppcheck-html binary (Default: {}) + --cppcheck-misra Activate the Cppcheck MISRA analysis + --distclean Clean analysis artifacts and reports + -h, --help Print this help + --no-build Skip the build Xen phase + --no-clean Don\'t clean the analysis artifacts on exit + --run-coverity Run the analysis for the Coverity tool + --run-cppcheck Run the Cppcheck analysis tool on Xen + --run-eclair Run the analysis for the Eclair tool """ - print(msg.format(sys.argv[0])) + print(msg.format(sys.argv[0], cppcheck_binpath, + cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath)) def parse_commandline(argv): global analysis_tool + global cppcheck_binpath + global cppcheck_html + global cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath + global cppcheck_misra global make_forward_args global outdir + global step_get_make_vars global step_parse_tags + global step_cppcheck_deps global step_build_xen + global step_cppcheck_report global step_clean_analysis + global step_distclean_analysis global target_build global target_clean + global target_distclean forward_to_make = False for option in argv: + args_with_content_regex = re.match(r'^(--[a-z]+[a-z-]*)=(.*)$', option) + if forward_to_make: # Intercept outdir outdir_regex = re.match("^O=(.*)$", option) @@ -60,6 +87,18 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): target_build = True elif option == "--clean-only": target_clean = True + elif args_with_content_regex and \ + args_with_content_regex.group(1) == "--cppcheck-bin": + cppcheck_binpath = args_with_content_regex.group(2) + elif option == "--cppcheck-html": + cppcheck_html = True + elif args_with_content_regex and \ + args_with_content_regex.group(1) == "--cppcheck-html-bin": + cppcheck_htmlreport_binpath = args_with_content_regex.group(2) + elif option == "--cppcheck-misra": + cppcheck_misra = True + elif option == "--distclean": + target_distclean = True elif (option == "--help") or (option == "-h"): help() sys.exit(0) @@ -69,6 +108,11 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): step_clean_analysis = False elif (option == "--run-coverity") or (option == "--run-eclair"): analysis_tool = option[6:] + elif (option == "--run-cppcheck"): + analysis_tool = "cppcheck" + step_get_make_vars = True + step_cppcheck_deps = True + step_cppcheck_report = True elif option == "--": forward_to_make = True else: @@ -76,13 +120,23 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): help() sys.exit(1) - if target_build and target_clean: - print("--build-only is not compatible with --clean-only argument.") + if target_build and (target_clean or target_distclean): + print("--build-only is not compatible with --clean-only/--distclean " + "argument.") sys.exit(1) + if target_distclean: + # Implicit activation of clean target + target_clean = True + + step_distclean_analysis = True + if target_clean: + step_get_make_vars = False step_parse_tags = False + step_cppcheck_deps = False step_build_xen = False + step_cppcheck_report = False step_clean_analysis = True return @@ -95,3 +149,4 @@ def parse_commandline(argv): step_parse_tags = False step_build_xen = True step_clean_analysis = False + step_cppcheck_report = False diff --git a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py index a912d812c3df..1193e3f4631e 100644 --- a/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py +++ b/xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ #!/usr/bin/env python3 -import os, re +import os, re, subprocess def grep(filepath, regex): @@ -35,3 +35,22 @@ def recursive_find_file(path, filename_regex, action = None): res.append(out) return res + + +def invoke_command(command, needs_output, exeption_type = Exception, + exeption_msg = ""): + try: + pipe_stdout = subprocess.PIPE if (needs_output == True) else None + output = subprocess.run(command, shell=True, check=True, + stdout=pipe_stdout, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT, + encoding='utf8') + except (subprocess.CalledProcessError, subprocess.SubprocessError) as e: + if needs_output == True: + exeption_msg = exeption_msg.format(e.cmd, output.stdout) + else: + exeption_msg = exeption_msg.format(e.cmd) + excp = exeption_type(exeption_msg) + excp.errorcode = e.returncode if hasattr(e, 'returncode') else 1 + raise excp + + return output.stdout diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh b/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh new file mode 100755 index 000000000000..e682f6b9d79d --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env bash + +set -e + +function help() { + cat <<EOF +Usage: ${0} [OPTION] ... -- <compiler arguments> + +This script is a wrapper for cppcheck that enables it to analyse the files that +are the target for the build, it is used in place of a selected compiler and the +make process will run it on every file that needs to be built. +All the arguments passed to the original compiler are forwarded to it without +modification, furthermore, they are used to improve the cppcheck analysis. + +Options: + --compiler= Use this compiler for the build + --cppcheck-cmd= Command line for the cppcheck analysis. + --cppcheck-html Prepare for cppcheck HTML output + --cppcheck-plat= Path to the cppcheck platform folder + --ignore-path= This script won't run cppcheck on the files having this + path, the compiler will run anyway on them. This argument + can be specified multiple times. + -h, --help Print this help +EOF +} + +CC_FILE="" +COMPILER="" +CPPCHECK_HTML="n" +CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="" +CPPCHECK_TOOL="" +CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="" +FORWARD_FLAGS="" +IGNORE_PATH="n" +IGNORE_PATH_LIST="" +JDB_FILE="" +OBJTREE_PATH="" + +# Variable used for arg parsing +forward_to_cc="n" +sm_tool_args="n" +obj_arg_content="n" + +for OPTION in "$@" +do + if [ "${forward_to_cc}" = "y" ]; then + if [[ ${OPTION} == *.c ]] + then + CC_FILE="${OPTION}" + elif [ "${OPTION}" = "-o" ] + then + # After -o there is the path to the obj file, flag it + obj_arg_content="y" + elif [ "${obj_arg_content}" = "y" ] + then + # This must be the path to the obj file, turn off flag and save path + OBJTREE_PATH="$(dirname "${OPTION}")" + obj_arg_content="n" + fi + # Forward any argument to the compiler + FORWARD_FLAGS="${FORWARD_FLAGS} ${OPTION}" + continue + fi + case ${OPTION} in + -h|--help) + help + exit 0 + ;; + --compiler=*) + COMPILER="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" + sm_tool_args="n" + ;; + --cppcheck-cmd=*) + CPPCHECK_TOOL="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" + sm_tool_args="y" + ;; + --cppcheck-html) + CPPCHECK_HTML="y" + sm_tool_args="n" + ;; + --cppcheck-plat=*) + CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH="$(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" + sm_tool_args="n" + ;; + --ignore-path=*) + IGNORE_PATH_LIST="${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} $(eval echo "${OPTION#*=}")" + sm_tool_args="n" + ;; + --) + forward_to_cc="y" + sm_tool_args="n" + ;; + *) + if [ "${sm_tool_args}" = "y" ]; then + CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS="${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} ${OPTION}" + else + echo "Invalid option ${OPTION}" + exit 1 + fi + ;; + esac +done + +if [ "${COMPILER}" = "" ] +then + echo "--compiler arg is mandatory." + exit 1 +fi + +function print_file() { + local text="${1}" + local init_file="${2}" + + if [ "${init_file}" = "y" ] + then + echo -e -n "${text}" > "${JDB_FILE}" + else + echo -e -n "${text}" >> "${JDB_FILE}" + fi +} + +function create_jcd() { + local line="${1}" + local arg_num=0 + local same_line=0 + + print_file "[\n" "y" + print_file " {\n" + print_file " \"arguments\": [\n" + + for arg in ${line}; do + # This code prevents to put comma in the last element of the list or on + # sequential lines that are going to be merged + [ "${arg_num}" -ne 0 ] && [ "${same_line}" -eq 0 ] && print_file ",\n" + if [ "${same_line}" -ne 0 ] + then + print_file "${arg}\"" + same_line=0 + elif [ "${arg}" = "-iquote" ] || [ "${arg}" = "-I" ] + then + # cppcheck doesn't understand -iquote, substitute with -I + print_file " \"-I" + same_line=1 + else + print_file " \"${arg}\"" + fi + arg_num=$(( arg_num + 1 )) + done + print_file "\n" + print_file " ],\n" + print_file " \"directory\": \"$(pwd -P)\",\n" + print_file " \"file\": \"${CC_FILE}\"\n" + print_file " }\n" + print_file "]\n" +} + + +# Execute compiler with forwarded flags +# Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on FORWARD_FLAGS, but they can't be +# used here +# shellcheck disable=SC2086 +${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS} + +if [ -n "${CC_FILE}" ]; +then + for path in ${IGNORE_PATH_LIST} + do + if [[ ${CC_FILE} == *${path}* ]] + then + IGNORE_PATH="y" + echo "${0}: ${CC_FILE} ignored by --ignore-path matching *${path}*" + fi + done + if [ "${IGNORE_PATH}" = "n" ] + then + JDB_FILE="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE}".json)" + + # Prepare the Json Compilation Database for the file + create_jcd "${COMPILER} ${FORWARD_FLAGS}" + + out_file="${OBJTREE_PATH}/$(basename "${CC_FILE%.c}".cppcheck.txt)" + + # Check wchar size + wchar_plat_suffix="t4" + # sed prints the last occurence of -f(no-)short-wchar which is the one + # applied to the file by the compiler + wchar_option=$(echo "${FORWARD_FLAGS}" | \ + sed -nre 's,.*(-f(no-)?short-wchar).*,\1,p') + if [ "${wchar_option}" = "-fshort-wchar" ] + then + wchar_plat_suffix="t2" + fi + + # Select the right target platform, ARCH is generated from Xen Makefile + platform="${CPPCHECK_PLAT_PATH}/${ARCH}-wchar_${wchar_plat_suffix}.xml" + if [ ! -f "${platform}" ] + then + echo "${platform} not found!" + exit 1 + fi + + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, but + # they can't be used here + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ + --output-file="${out_file}" \ + --platform=${platform} + + if [ "${CPPCHECK_HTML}" = "y" ] + then + # Shellcheck complains about missing quotes on CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS, + # but they can't be used here + # shellcheck disable=SC2086 + ${CPPCHECK_TOOL} ${CPPCHECK_TOOL_ARGS} \ + --project="${JDB_FILE}" \ + --output-file="${out_file%.txt}.xml" \ + --platform=${platform} \ + -q \ + --xml + fi + fi +fi diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..3aefa7ba5c98 --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<platform> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> + <sizeof> + <short>2</short> + <int>4</int> + <long>4</long> + <long-long>8</long-long> + <float>4</float> + <double>8</double> + <long-double>8</long-double> + <pointer>4</pointer> + <size_t>4</size_t> + <wchar_t>4</wchar_t> + </sizeof> +</platform> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..e345b934a986 --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<platform> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> + <sizeof> + <short>2</short> + <int>4</int> + <long>8</long> + <long-long>8</long-long> + <float>4</float> + <double>8</double> + <long-double>16</long-double> + <pointer>8</pointer> + <size_t>4</size_t> + <wchar_t>2</wchar_t> + </sizeof> +</platform> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..952b3640c91d --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<platform> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> + <sizeof> + <short>2</short> + <int>4</int> + <long>8</long> + <long-long>8</long-long> + <float>4</float> + <double>8</double> + <long-double>16</long-double> + <pointer>8</pointer> + <size_t>4</size_t> + <wchar_t>4</wchar_t> + </sizeof> +</platform> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..b2dc2fb2cc50 --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<platform> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> + <sizeof> + <short>2</short> + <int>4</int> + <long>8</long> + <long-long>8</long-long> + <float>4</float> + <double>8</double> + <long-double>16</long-double> + <pointer>8</pointer> + <size_t>8</size_t> + <wchar_t>2</wchar_t> + </sizeof> +</platform> diff --git a/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..21d97b611505 --- /dev/null +++ b/xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<platform> + <char_bit>8</char_bit> + <default-sign>unsigned</default-sign> + <sizeof> + <short>2</short> + <int>4</int> + <long>8</long> + <long-long>8</long-long> + <float>4</float> + <double>8</double> + <long-double>16</long-double> + <pointer>8</pointer> + <size_t>8</size_t> + <wchar_t>4</wchar_t> + </sizeof> +</platform> diff --git a/xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py b/xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py deleted file mode 100755 index 1c1b63ba56b8..000000000000 --- a/xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py +++ /dev/null @@ -1,86 +0,0 @@ -#!/usr/bin/env python - -""" -This script acts as a tool to merge XML files created by cppcheck. -Usage: - merge_cppcheck_reports.py [FILES] [OUTPUT] - - FILES - list of XML files with extension .cppcheck - OUTPUT - file to store results (with .xml extension). - If not specified, the script will print results to stdout. -""" - -import sys -from xml.etree import ElementTree - -def elements_equal(el1, el2): - if type(el1) != type(el2): return False - - if el1.find('location') is None: return False - if el2.find('location') is None: return False - - el1_location = str(el1.find('location').attrib) - el2_location = str(el2.find('location').attrib) - - if el1_location != el2_location: return False - - return True - -def contain_element(new, lst): - for elem in lst: - if elements_equal(new, elem): - return True - return False - -def merge(files): - try: - result_xml_root = ElementTree.parse(files[0]).getroot() - except: - print("Xml parsing error in %s\n" % (files[0])) - print("Please upgrade your cppcheck to version 2.7 or greater") - sys.exit(1) - insert_point = result_xml_root.findall("errors")[0] - curr = 1 - total = len(files) - numelem = len(insert_point) - for xml_file in files[1:]: - try: - xml_root = ElementTree.parse(xml_file).getroot() - except: - print("Xml parsing error in %s\n" % (xml_file)) - print("Please upgrade your cppcheck to version 2.7 or greater") - sys.exit(1) - curr_elem_list = list(insert_point) - new_elem_list = list(xml_root.findall("errors")[0]) - for xml_error_elem in new_elem_list: - if not contain_element(xml_error_elem, curr_elem_list): - insert_point.insert(1,xml_error_elem) - numelem = numelem + 1 - curr = curr + 1 - sys.stdout.write('\r') - sys.stdout.write(" %d / %d" % (curr,total)) - sys.stdout.flush() - - sys.stdout.write('\r\n') - print("Done: %d elements" % (numelem)) - return result_xml_root - -def run(): - files = [] - output = None - for i in sys.argv[1:]: - output = i if '.xml' in i else None - files.append(i) if '.cppcheck' in i else None - - result = merge(files) - - if result is None: - return - - if output is not None: - ElementTree.ElementTree(result).write(output) - else: - print(ElementTree.tostring(result).decode('utf-8')) - -if __name__ == '__main__': - run()
Change cppcheck invocation method by using the xen-analysis.py script using the arguments --run-cppcheck. Now cppcheck analysis will build Xen while the analysis is performed on the source files, it will produce a text report and an additional html output when the script is called with --cppcheck-html. With this patch cppcheck will benefit of platform configuration files that will help it to understand the target of the compilation and improve the analysis. To do so: - remove cppcheck rules from Makefile and move them to the script. - Update xen-analysis.py with the code to integrate cppcheck. - merge the script merge_cppcheck_reports.py into the xen-analysis script package and rework the code to integrate it. - add platform configuration files for cppcheck.. - add cppcheck-cc.sh script that is a wrapper for cppcheck and it's used as Xen compiler, it will intercept all flags given from the make build system and it will execute cppcheck on the compiled file together with the file compilation. - guarded hypercall-defs.c with CPPCHECK define because cppcheck gets confused as the file does not contain c code. - add false-positive-cppcheck.json file - update documentation. - update .gitignore Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com> --- .gitignore | 8 +- docs/misra/cppcheck.txt | 27 +- docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst | 7 +- docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json | 12 + docs/misra/xen-static-analysis.rst | 42 ++- xen/Makefile | 116 +------- xen/include/hypercall-defs.c | 9 + xen/scripts/xen-analysis.py | 18 +- xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py | 272 ++++++++++++++++++ .../xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py | 130 +++++++++ xen/scripts/xen_analysis/generic_analysis.py | 21 +- xen/scripts/xen_analysis/settings.py | 77 ++++- xen/scripts/xen_analysis/utils.py | 21 +- xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh | 223 ++++++++++++++ xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml | 17 ++ xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml | 17 ++ xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py | 86 ------ 20 files changed, 899 insertions(+), 255 deletions(-) create mode 100644 docs/misra/false-positive-cppcheck.json create mode 100644 xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_analysis.py create mode 100644 xen/scripts/xen_analysis/cppcheck_report_utils.py create mode 100755 xen/tools/cppcheck-cc.sh create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm32-wchar_t4.xml create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t2.xml create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/arm64-wchar_t4.xml create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t2.xml create mode 100644 xen/tools/cppcheck-plat/x86_64-wchar_t4.xml delete mode 100755 xen/tools/merge_cppcheck_reports.py