A question on pfd/sdv

NTDEV
1

Hello all,

I need a clarification about the use of pfd and sdv.

Usually I run both tools to get some info about bugs, but with no luck (that is, the driver is ok).

As an example, I forgot to create a timer and then I used it: a classic stupid copy and paste bug.

This kind of bug is not captured by pfd/sdv, I believe that I am not using them correctly.

Can you suggest articles/posts/other info?

Thank you

2

> This kind of bug is not captured by pfd/sdv, I believe that I am not using them correctly.

Surely they cannot catch all bugs, but many.

–
Maxim S. Shatskih
Windows DDK MVP
xxxxx@storagecraft.com
http://www.storagecraft.com

3

Is the init and use of the ktimer (in the now fixed code) in the same function or split across adddevice() and some other function?

d

tiny phone keyboard + fat thumbs = you do the muth

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@texa.it
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:05 AM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] A question on pfd/sdv

Hello all,

I need a clarification about the use of pfd and sdv.

Usually I run both tools to get some info about bugs, but with no luck (that is, the driver is ok).

As an example, I forgot to create a timer and then I used it: a classic stupid copy and paste bug.

This kind of bug is not captured by pfd/sdv, I believe that I am not using them correctly.

Can you suggest articles/posts/other info?

Thank you

—
NTDEV is sponsored by OSR

For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars

To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer

4

Doron: they are in two different functions

Maxim: I agree with you. Some years ago I tryed splint on a couple of libraries and, without annotations, I got a lot of warnings and errors. Without annotations the tool must make assumptions and this can explain the many messages of splint (more restrictive) and the no message of pfd/sdv (“trust the programmer”)

So the question is: must I add annotations to catch this kind of bugs?

5

If it is split across functions, PFD would not find this bug. PFD works on a per function basis. SDV could technically find this bug I guess, I don’t think there any annotations you could make to make SDV find this today, a new rule would have to be written

d

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com [mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of xxxxx@texa.it
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 11:41 PM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: RE:[ntdev] A question on pfd/sdv

Doron: they are in two different functions

Maxim: I agree with you. Some years ago I tryed splint on a couple of libraries and, without annotations, I got a lot of warnings and errors. Without annotations the tool must make assumptions and this can explain the many messages of splint (more restrictive) and the no message of pfd/sdv (“trust the programmer”)

So the question is: must I add annotations to catch this kind of bugs?

NTDEV is sponsored by OSR

For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars

To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer

6

Thank you Doron,

must I assume that the rule does not exist for every object (memory, iotarget, workitem, …) ?