In August 2011, Linux entered its third decade. Ten years before, Chou et al. published a study of faults found by applying a static analyzer to Linux versions 1.0 through 2.4.1. A major result of their work was that the drivers directory contained up to 7 times more of certain kinds of faults than other directories. This result inspired numerous efforts on improving the reliability of driver code. Today, Linux is used in a wider range of environments, provides a wider range of services, and has adopted a new development and release model. What has been the impact of these changes on code quality? To answer this question, we have transported Chou et al.’s experiments to all versions of Linux 2.6; released between 2003 and 2011. We find that Linux has more than doubled in size during this period, but the number of faults per line of code has been decreasing. Moreover, the fault rate of drivers is now below that of other directories, such as arch. These results can guide further development and research efforts for the decade to come. To allow updating these results as Linux evolves, we define our experimental protocol and make our checkers available.

Nominal unification is proven to be quadratic in time and space. It was so by two different approaches, both inspired by the Paterson-Wegman linear unification algorithm, but dramatically different in the way nominal and first-order constraints are dealt with. To handle nominal constraints, Levy and Villaret introduced the notion of replacing while Calves and Fernandez use permutations and sets of atoms. To deal with structural constraints, the former use multi-equations in a way similar to the Martelli-Montanari algorithm while the later mimic Paterson-Wegman. In this paper we abstract over these two approaches and genralize them into the notion of modality, highlighting the general ideas behind nominal unification. We show that replacings and environments are in fact isomorphic. This isomorphism is of prime importance to prove intricate properties on both sides and a step further to the real complexity of nominal unification.

In 2001, Chou et al. published a study of faults found by applying a static analyzer to Linux versions 1.0 through 2.4.1. A major result of their work was that the drivers directory contained up to 7 times more of certain kinds of faults than other directories. This result inspired a number of development and research efforts on improving the reliability of driver code. Today Linux is used in a much wider range of environments, provides a much wider range of services, and has adopted a new development and release model. What has been the impact of these changes on code quality? Are drivers still a major problem?