惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

量子位
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
博客园 - 司徒正美
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
IT之家
IT之家
H
Help Net Security
雷峰网
雷峰网
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
Microsoft Security Blog
Microsoft Security Blog
美团技术团队
GbyAI
GbyAI
博客园_首页
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
I
InfoQ
小众软件
小众软件
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
D
Docker
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
博客园 - Franky
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog

cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localization CodeMMR: Bridging Natural Language, Code, and Image for Unified Retrieval Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Verification Modulo Tested Library Contracts The Semi-Executable Stack: Agentic Software Engineering and the Expanding Scope of SE Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment From Procedural Skills to Strategy Genes: Towards Experience-Driven Test-Time Evolution Atropos: Improving Cost-Benefit Trade-off of LLM-based Agents under Self-Consistency with Early Termination and Model Hotswap Vibe-Coding: Feedback-Based Automated Verification with no Human Code Inspection, a Feasibility Study Benchmarks for Trajectory Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis in OpenClaw and Codex: ATBench-Claw and ATBench-Codex Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution AIPC: Agent-Based Automation for AI Model Deployment with Qualcomm AI Runtime Analyzing Chain of Thought (CoT) Approaches in Control Flow Code Deobfuscation Tasks Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks Prompt-Driven Code Summarization: A Systematic Literature Review LinuxArena: A Control Setting for AI Agents in Live Production Software Environments LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB Large Language Models to Enhance Business Process Modeling: Past, Present, and Future Trends CollabCoder: Plan-Code Co-Evolution via Collaborative Decision-Making for Efficient Code Generation Sentiment analysis for software engineering: How far can zero-shot learning (ZSL) go? Learning from Change: Predictive Models for Incident Prevention in a Regulated IT Environment
An Empirical Study of Configuration Mismatches in Linux
Sascha El-Sharkawy, Adam Krafczyk, Klaus Schmid · 2021-10-12 · via cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

Ideally the variability of a product line is represented completely and correctly by its variability model. However, in practice additional variability is often represented on the level of the build system or in the code. Such a situation may lead to inconsistencies, where the actually realized variability does not fully correspond to the one described by the variability model. In this paper we focus on configuration mismatches, i.e., cases where the effective variability differs from the variability as it is represented by the variability model. While previous research has already shown that these situations still exist even today in well-analyzed product lines like Linux, so far it was unclear under what circumstances such issues occur in reality. In particular, it is open what types of configuration mismatches occur and how severe they are. Here, our contribution is to close this gap by presenting a detailed manual analysis of 80 configuration mismatches in the Linux 4.4.1 kernel and assess their criticality. We identify various categories of configuration issues and show that about two-thirds of the configuration mismatches may actually lead to kernel misconfigurations.