An empirical study on the handling of crash reports in a large software company: An experience report

In this paper, we report on an empirical study we have conducted at Ericsson to understand the handling of crash reports (CRs). The study was performed on a dataset of CRs spanning over two years of activities on one of Ericsson´s largest systems (+4 Million LOC). CRs at Ericsson are divided into two types: Internal and External. Internal CRs are reported within the organization after the integration and system testing phase. External CRs are submitted by customers and caused mainly by field failures. We examine the proportion and severity of internal CRs and that of external CRs. A large number of external (and severe) CRs could indicate flaws in the testing phase. Failing to react quickly to external CRs, on the other hand, may expose Ericsson to fines and penalties due to the Working Level Agreements (WLA) that Ericsson has with its customers. Moreover, we contrast the time it takes to handle each type of CRs with the dual aim to understand the similarities and differences as well as the factors that impact the handling of each type of CRs. Our results show that (a) it takes more time to fix external CRs compared to internal CRs, (b) the severity attribute is used inconsistently through organizational units, (c) assignment time of internal CRs is less than that of external CRs, (d) More than 50% of CRs are not answered within the organization´s fixing time requirements defined in WLA.