From scan-admin at coverity.com Mon Jul 3 08:11:51 2023 From: scan-admin at coverity.com (scan-admin at coverity.com) Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2023 08:11:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Coverity Scan: Analysis completed for varnish Message-ID: <64a282c79884_10e342ad8ca17b998627ac@prd-scan-dashboard-0.mail> Your request for analysis of varnish has been completed successfully. The results are available at https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P0qcxCbhZ31OYv50yrJbcjUxJo9eCHXi2QbgV6mmItSKtPrD4wtuBl7WlE3MQ-3D-3DlV50_WyTzqwss9kUEGhvWd0SG502mTu1yasCtuh9h-2FD3Je4-2FgQZFt-2Fo6-2B0TZlgy31WZtV4T4ptDdblrYQoez-2FZvoxOyE9cMxXIav68pPB4O2nENlq1trFYFtvzkRH2WtWJObOOJ8fg1BaeAFCAJi75BuS2ri-2FsdBLUKOaJjXrYzBqNPiMa1twi-2BhtynoimKA8WhbqYM2K2pAGV51irOQEnMWpQvtoodccYPezIoX13vHofcU-3D Build ID: 541891 Analysis Summary: New defects found: 0 Defects eliminated: 1 From scan-admin at coverity.com Mon Jul 10 08:12:07 2023 From: scan-admin at coverity.com (scan-admin at coverity.com) Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2023 08:12:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Coverity Scan: Analysis completed for varnish Message-ID: <64abbd56e7aa6_7f9392ad8ca17b9986272d@prd-scan-dashboard-0.mail> Your request for analysis of varnish has been completed successfully. The results are available at https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P0qcxCbhZ31OYv50yrJbcjUxJo9eCHXi2QbgV6mmItSKtPrD4wtuBl7WlE3MQ-3D-3DuM1j_WyTzqwss9kUEGhvWd0SG502mTu1yasCtuh9h-2FD3Je49srqE6E80KIJRZVB8LIJ4RGx8jD3CGg7OKtxCc5ZqSAaGUpbjx9cuu6FSsrng6Z4l344mqYBDw4alAFKnK3cwhV0jt-2BUC7YS3xhrVhZWFzV5mJ-2FkF1ad4AfzfoSybSBce-2Fw3BsnaJAyS7efdjT0FyYPOGlNuWGhWkkmRjHj9-2FWXW6cph1vRrVLCEsw7sa6GpI-3D Build ID: 543292 Analysis Summary: New defects found: 0 Defects eliminated: 0 From dridi at varni.sh Tue Jul 11 15:17:07 2023 From: dridi at varni.sh (Dridi Boukelmoune) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 15:17:07 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents Message-ID: Greetings, When I write test cases involving multiple requests that don't need to come from the same client session I try to make one client per request. When a client reports something wrong, it's usual very convenient because I don't have to track down too many events. When I need to jump from a client error to Varnish logs, I find it increasingly frustrating to actually need to retrace events in the absence of an X-Varnish header. Would it be OK to have `client cNAME` send a `User-Agent: vtest (cNAME)` or similar to reduce some of it? This should be for the most part transparent, except for test cases doing request accounting or other header shenanigans (HPACK maybe?) that should be trivial to adjust. Thanks, Dridi From phk at phk.freebsd.dk Wed Jul 12 05:21:02 2023 From: phk at phk.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 05:21:02 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> -------- Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > Would it be OK to have `client cNAME` send a `User-Agent: vtest > (cNAME)` or similar to reduce some of it? I generally just use /c1 /c2 etc in the URL ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. From dridi at varni.sh Wed Jul 12 06:55:53 2023 From: dridi at varni.sh (Dridi Boukelmoune) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 06:55:53 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 5:21?AM Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > -------- > Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > > Would it be OK to have `client cNAME` send a `User-Agent: vtest > > (cNAME)` or similar to reduce some of it? > > I generally just use /c1 /c2 etc in the URL ? That's part of the frustration, whenever I'm troubleshooting a test case I have to jump through more hoops to get something useful. What I would like is something out of the box, such as clients advertising themselves in a User-Agent header. I would have considered `Server: vtest (sNAME)` if it weren't for the Via headers added by Varnish already. In that regard I no longer need an indirection to find out where the bereq went to when multiple servers are involved. Dridi From phk at phk.freebsd.dk Wed Jul 12 06:59:26 2023 From: phk at phk.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 06:59:26 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: References: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: <202307120659.36C6xQL2039420@critter.freebsd.dk> -------- Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 5:21=E2=80=AFAM Poul-Henning Kamp dk> wrote: > > > > -------- > > Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > > > > Would it be OK to have `client cNAME` send a `User-Agent: vtest > > > (cNAME)` or similar to reduce some of it? > > > > I generally just use /c1 /c2 etc in the URL ? > > That's part of the frustration, whenever I'm troubleshooting a test > case I have to jump through more hoops to get something useful. What I > would like is something out of the box, such as clients advertising > themselves in a User-Agent header. I would prefer you do not overload any Well Known Headers. X-VTC: c1 maybe ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. From dridi at varni.sh Wed Jul 12 07:10:33 2023 From: dridi at varni.sh (Dridi Boukelmoune) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 07:10:33 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: <202307120659.36C6xQL2039420@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> <202307120659.36C6xQL2039420@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 6:59?AM Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > -------- > Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 5:21=E2=80=AFAM Poul-Henning Kamp > dk> wrote: > > > > > > -------- > > > Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > > > > > > Would it be OK to have `client cNAME` send a `User-Agent: vtest > > > > (cNAME)` or similar to reduce some of it? > > > > > > I generally just use /c1 /c2 etc in the URL ? > > > > That's part of the frustration, whenever I'm troubleshooting a test > > case I have to jump through more hoops to get something useful. What I > > would like is something out of the box, such as clients advertising > > themselves in a User-Agent header. > > I would prefer you do not overload any Well Known Headers. > > X-VTC: c1 > > maybe ? In the spirit of rfc6648 i would rather use a "VTC-" prefix, so something more like VTC-Client: c1 But also, since a VTC client mocks a user agent, I would rather use the standard header for this. We can also add a -noua option similar to -nolen, -nohost and -nodate and imply -noua when an explicit `-hdr "User-Agent: other"` is present. Dridi From phk at phk.freebsd.dk Wed Jul 12 07:18:00 2023 From: phk at phk.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 07:18:00 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: References: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> <202307120659.36C6xQL2039420@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: <202307120718.36C7I0F1039703@critter.freebsd.dk> -------- Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > I would prefer you do not overload any Well Known Headers. > > > > X-VTC: c1 > > > > maybe ? > > In the spirit of rfc6648 i would rather use a "VTC-" prefix, so > something more like > > VTC-Client: c1 > > But also, since a VTC client mocks a user agent, I would rather use > the standard header for this. We can also add a -noua option similar > to -nolen, -nohost and -nodate and imply -noua when an explicit `-hdr > "User-Agent: other"` is present. So what about the servers ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. From dridi at varni.sh Wed Jul 12 07:45:18 2023 From: dridi at varni.sh (Dridi Boukelmoune) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 07:45:18 +0000 Subject: Varnishtest client user agents In-Reply-To: <202307120718.36C7I0F1039703@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <202307120521.36C5L21i033430@critter.freebsd.dk> <202307120659.36C6xQL2039420@critter.freebsd.dk> <202307120718.36C7I0F1039703@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 7:18?AM Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > -------- > Dridi Boukelmoune writes: > > > > I would prefer you do not overload any Well Known Headers. > > > > > > X-VTC: c1 > > > > > > maybe ? > > > > In the spirit of rfc6648 i would rather use a "VTC-" prefix, so > > something more like > > > > VTC-Client: c1 > > > > But also, since a VTC client mocks a user agent, I would rather use > > the standard header for this. We can also add a -noua option similar > > to -nolen, -nohost and -nodate and imply -noua when an explicit `-hdr > > "User-Agent: other"` is present. > > So what about the servers ? I would be on board with the user agent counterpart: User-Agent: vtest (c1) vs Server: vtest (s1) I suppose this would be even more useful for the `s0 -dispatch` case, where the Via header generated by varnishd would not carry this nuance. Dridi From slink at schokola.de Fri Jul 14 16:26:18 2023 From: slink at schokola.de (Nils Goroll) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 18:26:18 +0200 Subject: gcc -fanalyze fyi Message-ID: <6acb0b16-426d-1f4b-8194-067399b9d6c1@schokola.de> FYI: Triggered by some promising news *) I built gcc trunk (0d2673e995f0dd69f406a34d2e87d2a25cf3c285) and tried -fanalyze. I looked at the first couple of reports and believe they were all false positives. Also it seems gcc does not offer a way to annotate false positives, so for now I believe it is still of no use to us. Nils *) https://social.treehouse.systems/@thesamesam/110697332121438807 From phk at phk.freebsd.dk Fri Jul 14 17:22:45 2023 From: phk at phk.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 17:22:45 +0000 Subject: gcc -fanalyze fyi In-Reply-To: <6acb0b16-426d-1f4b-8194-067399b9d6c1@schokola.de> References: <6acb0b16-426d-1f4b-8194-067399b9d6c1@schokola.de> Message-ID: <202307141722.36EHMjJ7059599@critter.freebsd.dk> -------- Nils Goroll writes: > *) https://social.treehouse.systems/@thesamesam/110697332121438807 Yes, that is precisely the top priority item for GCC I have pointed out for ages... Or maybe not... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. From dridi at varni.sh Sat Jul 15 11:37:37 2023 From: dridi at varni.sh (Dridi Boukelmoune) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2023 11:37:37 +0000 Subject: gcc -fanalyze fyi In-Reply-To: <6acb0b16-426d-1f4b-8194-067399b9d6c1@schokola.de> References: <6acb0b16-426d-1f4b-8194-067399b9d6c1@schokola.de> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 4:26?PM Nils Goroll wrote: > > FYI: > > Triggered by some promising news *) I built gcc trunk > (0d2673e995f0dd69f406a34d2e87d2a25cf3c285) and tried -fanalyze. > > I looked at the first couple of reports and believe they were all false > positives. Also it seems gcc does not offer a way to annotate false positives, > so for now I believe it is still of no use to us. I tried every major iteration of GCC's -fanalyze with great success on small mostly-self-contained code bases, but past a certain size I only get noise. Dridi From scan-admin at coverity.com Mon Jul 17 08:47:49 2023 From: scan-admin at coverity.com (scan-admin at coverity.com) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 08:47:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Coverity Scan: Analysis completed for varnish Message-ID: <64b500355b5ca_22d322af8e64fd9b84578c@prd-scan-dashboard-0.mail> Your request for analysis of varnish has been completed successfully. The results are available at https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P0qcxCbhZ31OYv50yrJbcjUxJo9eCHXi2QbgV6mmItSKtPrD4wtuBl7WlE3MQ-3D-3DCR6o_WyTzqwss9kUEGhvWd0SG502mTu1yasCtuh9h-2FD3Je4-2FKkY8Ii-2BK-2B7H4f2qvsAOjg3-2FEVJ4pH708VsUXnKUxh6-2B7bzVrUIBMXofN-2FmE28KNGx7fteRo2c7iCXlXVTEsm6TgisOpCYUWqIVvoAB6qAASU8ptVfeHL44KVyAZl4CcLE5apjOHhSPll5g309NLLDjwxOejyk6yITSilvr-2B-2BxWRY-2Fzj2c1FRQEbZgi3DY77I-3D Build ID: 544664 Analysis Summary: New defects found: 0 Defects eliminated: 0 From scan-admin at coverity.com Mon Jul 24 08:10:45 2023 From: scan-admin at coverity.com (scan-admin at coverity.com) Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 08:10:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Coverity Scan: Analysis completed for varnish Message-ID: <64be32051a203_212332aec4476599871662@prd-scan-dashboard-0.mail> Your request for analysis of varnish has been completed successfully. The results are available at https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P0qcxCbhZ31OYv50yrJbcjUxJo9eCHXi2QbgV6mmItSKtPrD4wtuBl7WlE3MQ-3D-3DKJW6_WyTzqwss9kUEGhvWd0SG502mTu1yasCtuh9h-2FD3Je4-2BDncC9-2FaOAjbyTrnHFjI6qhEew5hxKm-2F-2BbJB8UndNFyRVWD5fO3JQFQia9Zs2Vhid-2FnGpU9fyReftbbPbUiGgpo-2B6pcxoHCKLAH1CQiyKJICnw0r-2B1LmCL3e2-2FNcLtheRbz-2FVhO2Se-2BDL5itcrMFSQbG6vlDbChEXik00Fff4pTSY2A4aONYlmMy5Wd3XmjHM-3D Build ID: 546161 Analysis Summary: New defects found: 0 Defects eliminated: 0 From scan-admin at coverity.com Mon Jul 31 08:46:29 2023 From: scan-admin at coverity.com (scan-admin at coverity.com) Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 08:46:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Coverity Scan: Analysis completed for varnish Message-ID: <64c774e4a3c34_8f0dc2aec4476599871646@prd-scan-dashboard-0.mail> Your request for analysis of varnish has been completed successfully. The results are available at https://u15810271.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=HRESupC-2F2Czv4BOaCWWCy7my0P0qcxCbhZ31OYv50yrJbcjUxJo9eCHXi2QbgV6mmItSKtPrD4wtuBl7WlE3MQ-3D-3DEwaB_WyTzqwss9kUEGhvWd0SG502mTu1yasCtuh9h-2FD3Je492jSxH7uJBOwTvx-2FOVD3zulBIOgVL6nMYjHtd-2BeVoRHjknUextudcPU-2BfjSiEokRL2xHsvydReOVUg1sek7arvczDR7ouE-2FgOE4jSQozSIG1uNMM75Fer6U7K-2Bz0olXFmAQUu9yMGypWCTtVpqkP-2F737rE9-2FzewPwRripcJEbO9QD6au1y674xqJ-2BwC1H6FLM-3D Build ID: 547630 Analysis Summary: New defects found: 0 Defects eliminated: 0