[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH] x86/guest_walk: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.3
- To: Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 12:09:20 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=6Th0IQ8i31FurnE2amFDWmXurFqs9R+EX8R9gdEHbNw=; b=ZLtRJ+FJG2LzVA/4TLXPgSqe7L5lPO7M6Z39H1RJ8C/uK0xVP7cyV+C+RL2qRsEDMAdpA/asEVEjkursx7CAHOxpmq+LM9+6BEqP0CXAsrrT+cd2NjmqnyoGJzgr49ocgVm68luFygHzA7oOMZKAJP9JhwwLv3/wzEYj4cRCG53VM4QhdrrSgNEBFY7TMoho8pJEpStO9cI2bnAeeq4UKhqcqX14u3gvyqa8+UNRfHhhJw1De6SyYBeb7qcyrycHjUhqtfLqBch5zlWv0ur/OmRggkkwb+sa3SDyiNwRrbABTGzPzbrqU4MjDhq/SQcs6/0G/a1nZ6ceIkWNK5W/Jg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=OvOPzws7wYunGbHQBCPKXYUYuysJIZg4rQ1mFqmrJTZ2cpS5OqlNaR8Rrn4TafvXkY6yO49cWD0egOOGbx0FoccN8dDPL44fPU+mJlK1+uAP4Ijui/4QP+KXU4auwTlFBPJcQeD2GEtBjdeI++B3qmS5Os+BNJV9JezHZ/rmegGy6PA/jQIp02+Pt+V7p45ahjtOJDfEKWe+DcPgztW2AMCjLhcPvSnxdWp/1q/qoriduxL8MPvGS5UPQhfhStCU8hbOfOwW4zq/hxh4i92h4VWKThdoTyBuumGXAIJzG3NMpd39LKFCdjNSJnXhRtg1nUwyXrMciYy0GcvocnBt7Q==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 11:09:34 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 29.11.2023 10:35, Federico Serafini wrote:
> I take this opportunity to inform that we are really close to the end
> with Rule 8.3 for x86, this is the situation:
> - do_multicall(), Stefano sent a patch;
> - guest_walk_tables(), Andrew will take care of it;
> - xenmem_add_to_physmap_one(), this is the last one.
>
> For the latter, I see you (x86) share the declaration with ARM,
> where "gfn" is used for the last parameter instead of "gpfn".
> Do you agree in changing the name in the definition from "gpfn"
> to "gfn"?
Yes.
> If you agree, do you have any suggestions on how to rename
> the local variable "gfn"?
Considering its exclusive use for the XENMAPSPACE_gmfn case, I'm inclined
to suggest "gmfn", despite this being a term we generally try to get rid
of. Maybe Andrew or Roger have a better suggestion.
Along with renaming "gpfn" it would be nice (for consistency) to also
rename "old_gpfn" at the same time.
Jan
|
