Re: [XEN PATCH 1/4] xen/arm: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 13.1

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Stefano,

On 19/10/2023 19:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > We usually use this trick when 'current' is used multiple time to save
> > > process (using 'current' is not cost free). But in this case, this is
> > > renaming without any apparent benefits.
> > >
> > > If we wanted to go down this route, then this would likely want a comment.
> > > At which point we should just deviate.
> > >
> > > I will have a think if there are something else we can do. Could we consider
> > > to not address it for now?
> > I totally agree.
> I am wondering if we could deviate "current" because even with the
> implementation using volatile we know it doesn't have "side effects" in
> the sense of changing things for other code outside the function.
I will let Simone to confirm whether it is possible to do it from a 
technical point of view.
Leaving the technical part aside, is the only violations are the one in 
this patch? If so, I don't think it makes sense to deviate 'current' 
globally. It would be better to have local deviations.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall