Re: [PATCH] docs/misra: add rule 2.1 exceptions

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 23 Aug 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 23.08.2023 02:24, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > During the discussions that led to the acceptable of Rule 2.1, we
> 
> Nit (as before): "acceptance"?
> 
> > decided on a few exceptions that were not properly recorded in
> > rules.rst. Add them now.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  docs/misra/rules.rst | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/docs/misra/rules.rst b/docs/misra/rules.rst
> > index b6d87e076b..8f38227994 100644
> > --- a/docs/misra/rules.rst
> > +++ b/docs/misra/rules.rst
> > @@ -107,7 +107,18 @@ maintainers if you want to suggest a change.
> >     * - `Rule 2.1 
> > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_02_01_1.c>`_
> >       - Required
> >       - A project shall not contain unreachable code
> > -     -
> > +     - The following are allowed:
> > +         - Invariantly constant conditions, e.g. 
> > if(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HVM)) { S; }
> > +         - Switch with a controlling value statically determined not to
> > +           match one or more case statements
> > +         - Functions that are intended to be never referenced from C
> > +           code (e.g. 'do_trap_fiq')
> 
> Maybe better put it the other way around, "only referenced from assembly
> code"? This is because "never referenced from C" also includes truly
> unreferenced functions/data.
> 
> > +         - Unreachability caused by the certain macros/functions is
> > +           deliberate, e.g. BUG, assert_failed, panic, etc.
> 
> I think the "the" here wants dropping, and even then the result doesn't
> read very well imo. How about "Deliberate unreachability caused by
> certain macros/functions, e.g. BUG, assert_failed, panic, etc"?
> 
> > +         - asm-offsets.c, as they are not linked deliberately, because
> > +           they are used to generate definitions for asm modules
> > +         - declarations without initializer are safe, as they are not
> > +           executed
> 
> Provided additionally this sub-sub-bullet-list then also translates
> correctly to the various derived formats, then:
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

Yes I checked. Also thanks for the good suggestions, I'll make the
changes and resend.