Skip to content

Package Preprocessor 5 #29

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Jul 29, 2022
Merged

Conversation

knewbury01
Copy link
Contributor

@knewbury01 knewbury01 commented Jul 25, 2022

Description

Package Preprocessor 5

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • RULE-20-7
    • PRE32-C
    • MSC38-C
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

@knewbury01 knewbury01 requested a review from mbaluda July 25, 2022 14:52
@knewbury01 knewbury01 self-assigned this Jul 26, 2022
@knewbury01
Copy link
Contributor Author

Notes for PRE32-C

the cert rule description says: "This rule also applies to the use of preprocessor directives in arguments to any function"

the info we have available in the CodeQL DB actually would let us know if the function is implemented as a macro, and we could have a pretty precise implementation of the rule, BUT since it says to include any function, I have done so. As a result, I use a heuristic that means there will be some FP's, since we do not have an "end" line for multi line function calls where the args are split over many lines.

@knewbury01
Copy link
Contributor Author

Notes for MSC38-C

wasnt sure if its better to modify the shared lib here or to make a assert.h copy in the specific rule test folder, currently mod'd in the shared location

Copy link
Contributor

@mbaluda mbaluda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The PR lgtm! I learned something more about macros...

Minor fixes:

  • generate help files
  • add implementation_scope where needed
  • move the definition of the assert function in the test itself

@knewbury01 knewbury01 enabled auto-merge July 29, 2022 14:31
@mbaluda mbaluda self-requested a review July 29, 2022 14:31
Copy link
Contributor

@mbaluda mbaluda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@knewbury01 knewbury01 merged commit fde0df0 into github:main Jul 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants