Re: [XEN PATCH v2] xen/string: add missing parameter names

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/08/2023 12:52 pm, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>
>> On 3 Aug 2023, at 12:46, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Luca,
>>
>> On 03/08/2023 11:28, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>>> On 3 Aug 2023, at 09:26, Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Add missing parameter names to address violation of MISRA C:2012
>>>> rule 8.2 ("Function types shall be in prototype form with named
>>>> parameters").
>>>>
>>>> No functional changes.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>  - memset() adjusted.
>>>> ---
>>>> xen/include/xen/string.h | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/string.h b/xen/include/xen/string.h
>>>> index b4d2217a96..e91e3112e0 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/string.h
>>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/string.h
>>>> @@ -12,27 +12,27 @@
>>>> #define strncpy __xen_has_no_strncpy__
>>>> #define strncat __xen_has_no_strncat__
>>>>
>>>> -size_t strlcpy(char *, const char *, size_t);
>>>> -size_t strlcat(char *, const char *, size_t);
>>>> -int strcmp(const char *, const char *);
>>>> -int strncmp(const char *, const char *, size_t);
>>>> -int strcasecmp(const char *, const char *);
>>>> -int strncasecmp(const char *, const char *, size_t);
>>>> -char *strchr(const char *, int);
>>>> -char *strrchr(const char *, int);
>>>> -char *strstr(const char *, const char *);
>>>> -size_t strlen(const char *);
>>>> -size_t strnlen(const char *, size_t);
>>>> -char *strpbrk(const char *, const char *);
>>>> -char *strsep(char **, const char *);
>>>> -size_t strspn(const char *, const char *);
>>>> -
>>>> -void *memset(void *, int, size_t);
>>>> -void *memcpy(void *, const void *, size_t);
>>>> -void *memmove(void *, const void *, size_t);
>>>> -int memcmp(const void *, const void *, size_t);
>>>> -void *memchr(const void *, int, size_t);
>>>> -void *memchr_inv(const void *, int, size_t);
>>>> +size_t strlcpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t size);
>>>> +size_t strlcat(char *dest, const char *src, size_t size);
>>>> +int strcmp(const char *cs, const char *ct);
>>>> +int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count);
>>>> +int strcasecmp(const char *s1, const char *s2);
>>>> +int strncasecmp(const char *s1, const char *s2, size_t len);
>>>> +char *strchr(const char *s, int c);
>>>> +char *strrchr(const char *s, int c);
>>>> +char *strstr(const char *s1, const char *s2);
>>>> +size_t strlen(const char *s);
>>>> +size_t strnlen(const char *s, size_t count);
>>>> +char *strpbrk(const char *cs, const char *ct);
>>>> +char *strsep(char **s, const char *ct);
>>>> +size_t strspn(const char *s, const char *accept);
>>>> +
>>>> +void *memset(void *s, int c, size_t count);
>>>> +void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count);
>>> There is a comment in arch/arm/rm32/lib/memcpy.S with this:
>>> /* Prototype: void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n); */
>>>> +void *memmove(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count);
>>> There is a comment in arch/arm/rm32/lib/memmove.S with this:
>>>  * Prototype: void *memmove(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n);
>>>> +int memcmp(const void *cs, const void *ct, size_t count);
>>>> +void *memchr(const void *s, int c, size_t n);
>>>> +void *memchr_inv(const void *s, int c, size_t n);
>>> @Stefano: would it make sense to remove it as part of this patch or maybe 
>>> not?
>> They are a verbatim copy of the Linux code. So I would rather no touch it.
> Oh I see! Thank you for pointing that out, then I’m wondering if it’s there a 
> reason why we
> are using ‘count’ instead of ’n’ as third parameter name, I know Stefano 
> suggested that, so
> It’s just a curiosity. Maybe it’s for clarity?

'n' is what the parameter is called in the C spec.

~Andrew