Mining Fix Patterns for FindBugs Violations

In this paper, we first collect and track a large number of fixed and unfixed violations across revisions of software. The empirical analyses reveal that there are discrepancies in the distributions of violations that are detected and those that are fixed, in terms of occurrences, spread and categories, which can provide insights into prioritizing violations. To automatically identify patterns in violations and their fixes, we propose an approach that utilizes convolutional neural networks to learn features and clustering to regroup similar instances. We then evaluate the usefulness of the identified fix patterns by applying them to unfixed violations. The results show that developers will accept and merge a majority (69/116) of fixes generated from the inferred fix patterns. It is also noteworthy that the yielded patterns are applicable to four real bugs in the Defects4J major benchmark for software testing and automated repair.Comment: Accepted for IEEE Transactions on Software Engineerin

FixMiner: Mining Relevant Fix Patterns for Automated Program Repair

Patching is a common activity in software development. It is generally performed on a source code base to address bugs or add new functionalities. In this context, given the recurrence of bugs across projects, the associated similar patches can be leveraged to extract generic fix actions. While the literature includes various approaches leveraging similarity among patches to guide program repair, these approaches often do not yield fix patterns that are tractable and reusable as actionable input to APR systems. In this paper, we propose a systematic and automated approach to mining relevant and actionable fix patterns based on an iterative clustering strategy applied to atomic changes within patches. The goal of FixMiner is thus to infer separate and reusable fix patterns that can be leveraged in other patch generation systems. Our technique, FixMiner, leverages Rich Edit Script which is a specialized tree structure of the edit scripts that captures the AST-level context of the code changes. FixMiner uses different tree representations of Rich Edit Scripts for each round of clustering to identify similar changes. These are abstract syntax trees, edit actions trees, and code context trees. We have evaluated FixMiner on thousands of software patches collected from open source projects. Preliminary results show that we are able to mine accurate patterns, efficiently exploiting change information in Rich Edit Scripts. We further integrated the mined patterns to an automated program repair prototype, PARFixMiner, with which we are able to correctly fix 26 bugs of the Defects4J benchmark. Beyond this quantitative performance, we show that the mined fix patterns are sufficiently relevant to produce patches with a high probability of correctness: 81% of PARFixMiner's generated plausible patches are correct.Comment: 31 pages, 11 figure

An Empirical Study on Android-related Vulnerabilities

Mobile devices are used more and more in everyday life. They are our cameras, wallets, and keys. Basically, they embed most of our private information in our pocket. For this and other reasons, mobile devices, and in particular the software that runs on them, are considered first-class citizens in the software-vulnerabilities landscape. Several studies investigated the software-vulnerabilities phenomenon in the context of mobile apps and, more in general, mobile devices. Most of these studies focused on vulnerabilities that could affect mobile apps, while just few investigated vulnerabilities affecting the underlying platform on which mobile apps run: the Operating System (OS). Also, these studies have been run on a very limited set of vulnerabilities. In this paper we present the largest study at date investigating Android-related vulnerabilities, with a specific focus on the ones affecting the Android OS. In particular, we (i) define a detailed taxonomy of the types of Android-related vulnerability; (ii) investigate the layers and subsystems from the Android OS affected by vulnerabilities; and (iii) study the survivability of vulnerabilities (i.e., the number of days between the vulnerability introduction and its fixing). Our findings could help OS and apps developers in focusing their verification & validation activities, and researchers in building vulnerability detection tools tailored for the mobile world

Understanding Persistent-Memory Related Issues in the Linux Kernel

Persistent memory (PM) technologies have inspired a wide range of PM-based system optimizations. However, building correct PM-based systems is difficult due to the unique characteristics of PM hardware. To better understand the challenges as well as the opportunities to address them, this paper presents a comprehensive study of PM-related issues in the Linux kernel. By analyzing 1,553 PM-related kernel patches in-depth and conducting experiments on reproducibility and tool extension, we derive multiple insights in terms of PM patch categories, PM bug patterns, consequences, fix strategies, triggering conditions, and remedy solutions. We hope our results could contribute to the development of robust PM-based storage systemsComment: ACM TRANSACTIONS ON STORAGE(TOS'23

Is It Safe to Uplift This Patch? An Empirical Study on Mozilla Firefox

In rapid release development processes, patches that fix critical issues, or implement high-value features are often promoted directly from the development channel to a stabilization channel, potentially skipping one or more stabilization channels. This practice is called patch uplift. Patch uplift is risky, because patches that are rushed through the stabilization phase can end up introducing regressions in the code. This paper examines patch uplift operations at Mozilla, with the aim to identify the characteristics of uplifted patches that introduce regressions. Through statistical and manual analyses, we quantitatively and qualitatively investigate the reasons behind patch uplift decisions and the characteristics of uplifted patches that introduced regressions. Additionally, we interviewed three Mozilla release managers to understand organizational factors that affect patch uplift decisions and outcomes. Results show that most patches are uplifted because of a wrong functionality or a crash. Uplifted patches that lead to faults tend to have larger patch size, and most of the faults are due to semantic or memory errors in the patches. Also, release managers are more inclined to accept patch uplift requests that concern certain specific components, and-or that are submitted by certain specific developers.Comment: In proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME 2017