Re: [XEN PATCH][for-4.19 v4] xen: address violations of Rule 11.9

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 19.10.2023 09:55, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> The constant 0 is used instead of NULL in '__ACCESS_ONCE' as a
> compile-time check to detect non-scalar types; its usage for this
> purpose is deviated.
> 
> Furthermore, the 'typeof_field' macro is introduced as a general way
> to access the type of a struct member without declaring a variable
> of struct type. Both this macro and 'sizeof_field' are moved to
> 'xen/macros.h'.
> 
> No functional change intended.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - added entry in deviations.rst
> Changes in v3:
> - dropped access_field
> - moved macro to macros.h
> ---
> Changes in v4:
> - Amend deviation record.
> ---
>  automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl |  9 +++++++++
>  docs/misra/deviations.rst                        |  6 ++++++
>  xen/include/xen/compiler.h                       |  8 --------
>  xen/include/xen/kernel.h                         |  2 +-
>  xen/include/xen/macros.h                         | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>  5 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

I tried to commit this patch, but ...

> diff --git a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl 
> b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> index fa56e5c00a27..28d9c37bedb2 100644
> --- a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> +++ b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> @@ -246,6 +246,15 @@ constant expressions are required.\""
>    "any()"}
>  -doc_end
> 
> +#
> +# Series 11
> +#
> +
> +-doc_begin="This construct is used to check if the type is scalar, and for 
> this purpose the use of 0 as a null pointer constant is deliberate."
> +-config=MC3R1.R11.9,reports+={deliberate, 
> "any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^__ACCESS_ONCE$))))"
> +}
> +-doc_end
> +
>  #
>  # Series 13
>  #

... this change doesn't apply, and I also can't see how it would. There were
no dependencies specified, so it's also not clear on top of which other
(ready to be committed) patch(es) this might have been meant to apply. Please
resubmit in a shape applicable to the staging branch.

Jan