Skip to content

Conversation

@jketema
Copy link
Collaborator

@jketema jketema commented Nov 27, 2025

Description

please enter the description of your change here

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • rule number here
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

  • Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

@jketema jketema force-pushed the jketema/frontend-update branch from 8c81721 to ae21fb5 Compare December 11, 2025 14:41
@jketema jketema marked this pull request as ready for review January 3, 2026 14:51
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 3, 2026 14:51
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR updates test expected results and test annotations following a frontend update. The changes reflect how the CodeQL frontend now reports source locations and appear to address test failures caused by these frontend changes.

  • Updated expected test results for AUTOSAR rule A2-10-5 to reflect new location reporting for template variable declarations
  • Modified test annotations for MISRA RULE-14-3 to add line numbering and update expected behavior markers

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
cpp/autosar/test/rules/A2-10-5/IdentifierNameOfANonMemberObjectWithExternalOrInternalLinkageIsReused.expected Updates location coordinates for number_two template variable (column 39-48 instead of 50) and adds missing line numbers (3, 6) to test expectations
c/misra/test/rules/RULE-14-3/test.c Adds line number prefix to line 45 and changes annotation from NON_COMPLIANT to NON_COMPLIANT[FALSE_NEGATIVE]

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@jketema jketema force-pushed the jketema/frontend-update branch from ae21fb5 to 11d0d15 Compare January 3, 2026 14:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant