Understanding bug fix patterns in verilog

Authors:
Sangeetha Sudakrishnan;Janaki Madhavan;E. James Whitehead, Jr.;Jose Renau
Affiliations:
Univ. of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA;Univ. of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA;Univ. of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA;Univ. of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Venue:
Proceedings of the 2008 international working conference on Mining software repositories
Year:
2008

Citing 10
Cited 1

High-level design verification of microprocessors via error modeling

ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TODAES)
Extended static checking for Java

PLDI '02 Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming language design and implementation
Bug Patterns in Java

Bug Patterns in Java
Hipikat: recommending pertinent software development artifacts

Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering
Identifying Reasons for Software Changes Using Historic Databases

ICSM '00 Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM'00)
Populating a Release History Database from Version Control and Bug Tracking Systems

ICSM '03 Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance
A Comparison of Bug Finding Tools for Java

ISSRE '04 Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering
Finding bugs is easy

ACM SIGPLAN Notices
ASTLOG: a language for examining abstract syntax trees

DSL'97 Proceedings of the Conference on Domain-Specific Languages on Conference on Domain-Specific Languages (DSL), 1997
Using evolution patterns to find duplicated bugs

Using evolution patterns to find duplicated bugs

A program differencing algorithm for verilog HDL

Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Today, many electronic systems are developed using a hardware description language, a kind of software that can be converted into integrated circuits or programmable logic devices. Like traditional software projects, hardware projects have bugs, and significant developer time is spent fixing them. A useful first step toward reducing bugs in hardware is developing an understanding of the frequency of different types of errors. Once the most common types are known, it is then possible to focus attention on eliminating them. As most hardware projects use software configuration management repositories, these can be mined for the textual bug fix changes. In this project, we analyze the bug fix history of four hardware projects written in Verilog and manually define 25 bug fix patterns. The frequency of each bug type is then computed for all projects. We find that 29 -- 55% of the bug fix pattern instances in Verilog involve assignment statements, while 18 -- 25% are related to if statements.