Re: [XEN PATCH] x86/guest_walk: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.3

[Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 29/11/23 12:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
> 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.
Thank you.

--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.

Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)