I’ve recently been playing with PREfast 1.5.2400 (from the Win2003 DDK)
and it’s a decent tool; it found some real bugs for me. I wanted to
first try the next version of it, PREfast 1.5.2402
So, I’m trying to find PREfast 1.5.2402 (or anything short of the WDK 7
version), but have been unable to find it.
The “Static Analysis Verification_Drvs.ppt” talk slides mention that the
slightly newer one (1.5.2402 versus 1.5.2400) is available on a newer
version of the Windows 2003 SP1 DDK:
* “(Old) Drivers version (1.5.2402): Default in the newest Server
2003 SP1 DDK.”
* “Non-drivers version (1.5.2400): Default in older versions of
2003 SP1 DDK.”
But I’ve gotten 3 versions of the Win2003 SP 1 DDK off of the Microsoft
web site, and all of them have PREfast 1.5.2400.
So, where could I find this newer version of PREfast?
And a followup: I have a non-WDK driver on XP; should I try to get the
WDK 7 version of PREfast running on it or is there no real chance of it
working well?
Thanks for any assistance!
Taed Wynnell wrote:
I’ve recently been playing with PREfast 1.5.2400 (from the Win2003
DDK) and it’s a decent tool; it found some real bugs for me. I wanted
to first try the next version of it, PREfast 1.5.2402
So, I’m trying to find PREfast 1.5.2402 (or anything short of the WDK
7 version), but have been unable to find it.
…
And a followup: I have a non-WDK driver on XP; should I try to get
the WDK 7 version of PREfast running on it or is there no real chance
of it working well?
What do you mean by “non-WDK driver”? Do you mean “non-WDM”? PREfast
can certainly work with those.
–
Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
Have you tried any of the Vista/S2K8 (not R2) WDK’s?
That being said, finding specific versions of anything msft is never straightforward, and often not apparently possible, as things have been known to disappear, get renamed or even reviriginized as the ‘newest’ verison of an existing version.
Default in the newest Server 2003 SP1 DDK.
And then there’s WS2K8 R2 RC…
Good luck,
mm
Why Prefast 9.0 from WDK 7100 is not good for you?
–pa
Taed Wynnell wrote:
I’ve recently been playing with PREfast 1.5.2400 (from the Win2003 DDK)
and it’s a decent tool; it found some real bugs for me. I wanted to
first try the next version of it, PREfast 1.5.2402
So, I’m trying to find PREfast 1.5.2402 (or anything short of the WDK 7
version), but have been unable to find it.
The “Static Analysis Verification_Drvs.ppt” talk slides mention that the
slightly newer one (1.5.2402 versus 1.5.2400) is available on a newer
version of the Windows 2003 SP1 DDK:
* “(Old) Drivers version (1.5.2402): Default in the newest Server
2003 SP1 DDK.”
* “Non-drivers version (1.5.2400): Default in older versions of
2003 SP1 DDK.”
But I’ve gotten 3 versions of the Win2003 SP 1 DDK off of the Microsoft
web site, and all of them have PREfast 1.5.2400.
So, where could I find this newer version of PREfast?
And a followup: I have a non-WDK driver on XP; should I try to get the
WDK 7 version of PREfast running on it or is there no real chance of it
working well?
Thanks for any assistance!
The big problem with Prefast 9 is if you are like me and want to be “RreFast
Clean” once you fix all the required typedef’s you cannot go back to an
earlier version of the WDK and you cannot ship your driver with that WDK
yet. If you do not mind ignoring these warnings, then it is the best one to
use.
–
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Website: http://www.windrvr.com
Blog: http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
“Pavel A.” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Why Prefast 9.0 from WDK 7100 is not good for you?
>
> --pa
>
>
> Taed Wynnell wrote:
>>
>> I’ve recently been playing with PREfast 1.5.2400 (from the Win2003 DDK)
>> and it’s a decent tool; it found some real bugs for me. I wanted to
>> first try the next version of it, PREfast 1.5.2402
>> So, I’m trying to find PREfast 1.5.2402 (or anything short of the WDK 7
>> version), but have been unable to find it.
>> The “Static Analysis Verification_Drvs.ppt” talk slides mention that the
>> slightly newer one (1.5.2402 versus 1.5.2400) is available on a newer
>> version of the Windows 2003 SP1 DDK:
>> * “(Old) Drivers version (1.5.2402): Default in the newest Server
>> 2003 SP1 DDK.”
>> * “Non-drivers version (1.5.2400): Default in older versions of 2003
>> SP1 DDK.”
>> But I’ve gotten 3 versions of the Win2003 SP 1 DDK off of the Microsoft
>> web site, and all of them have PREfast 1.5.2400.
>> So, where could I find this newer version of PREfast?
>> And a followup: I have a non-WDK driver on XP; should I try to get the
>> WDK 7 version of PREfast running on it or is there no real chance of it
>> working well?
>> Thanks for any assistance!
>>
>
>
> Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4181 (20090623)
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4181 (20090623)
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
I had thought that the newest PREfast was only for WDM drivers, based on info from that presentation.
I tried the newest PREfast 9.0.21022.90421 version, and it worked reasonably well.
I did have one code module that compiled cleanly with just Visual Studio, but failed completely with hundreds of errors (not PREfast errors, but compiler errors) when using PREfast. Oh well, I’ll play with that in the future.
Thanks to all for the advice.
By the way, my goal here was to do a quick-and-dirty evaluation of PREfast versus Coverity. It wasn’t a perfect comparison test, but what I did was take 6 clear errors in different modules identified by Coverity. I then checked the same code with PREfast. 5 of those 6 errors were also identified by PREfast. (Note that I didn’t do a reverse comparison.) The only one that wasn’t found by PREfast (but was by Coverity) was code like this:
ASSERT (index++);
which is an error since the debug code will be functional different from the release code.
I’ve consulted with a firm that used Coverity. Between PreFast and PC-Lint
we essentially found all the same errors, plus more., considering the price
difference Coverity lost.
–
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Website: http://www.windrvr.com
Blog: http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>I had thought that the newest PREfast was only for WDM drivers, based on
>info from that presentation.
>
> I tried the newest PREfast 9.0.21022.90421 version, and it worked
> reasonably well.
>
> I did have one code module that compiled cleanly with just Visual Studio,
> but failed completely with hundreds of errors (not PREfast errors, but
> compiler errors) when using PREfast. Oh well, I’ll play with that in the
> future.
>
> Thanks to all for the advice.
>
> By the way, my goal here was to do a quick-and-dirty evaluation of PREfast
> versus Coverity. It wasn’t a perfect comparison test, but what I did was
> take 6 clear errors in different modules identified by Coverity. I then
> checked the same code with PREfast. 5 of those 6 errors were also
> identified by PREfast. (Note that I didn’t do a reverse comparison.) The
> only one that wasn’t found by PREfast (but was by Coverity) was code like
> this:
> ASSERT (index++);
> which is an error since the debug code will be functional different from
> the release code.
>
>
>
> Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4189 (20090625)
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4189 (20090625)
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com