[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN PATCH 01/11] x86/efi: move variable declaration to address MISRA C:2012 Rule 2.1
On Wed, 2 Aug 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > The variable declaration is moved where it's actually used, rather > than being declared in the switch before any clause, thus being > classified as unreachable code. > > No functional changes. > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h b/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h > index 92f4cfe8bd..b00441b1a2 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h > @@ -390,8 +390,6 @@ static void __init efi_arch_edd(void) > { > switch ( DevicePathType(devp.DevPath) ) > { > - const u8 *p; > - > case ACPI_DEVICE_PATH: > if ( state != root || boot_edd_info_nr > EDD_INFO_MAX ) > break; > @@ -463,7 +461,8 @@ static void __init efi_arch_edd(void) > params->device_path_info_length = > sizeof(struct edd_device_params) - > offsetof(struct edd_device_params, key); > - for ( p = (const u8 *)¶ms->key; p < ¶ms->checksum; > ++p ) > + for ( const u8 *p = (const u8 *)¶ms->key; > + p < ¶ms->checksum; ++p ) In Xen we don't mix declaration and code. So the following is not something we use: for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) I think you'd have to introduce another block under case MESSAGING_DEVICE_PATH so that you can moved const u8 *p there > params->checksum -= *p; > break; > case MEDIA_DEVICE_PATH: > -- > 2.34.1 >
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |