Re: [XEN PATCH 05/10] xen/perfc: address violations of MISRA C Rule 20.7

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2024-02-29 17:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 29.02.2024 16:27, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> > --- a/xen/common/perfc.c
> > +++ b/xen/common/perfc.c
> > @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@
> >  #include <public/sysctl.h>
> >  #include <asm/perfc.h>
> >
> > -#define PERFCOUNTER( var, name )              { name, TYPE_SINGLE, 0 
> > },
> > -#define PERFCOUNTER_ARRAY( var, name, size )  { name, TYPE_ARRAY,  
> > size },
> > -#define PERFSTATUS( var, name )               { name, TYPE_S_SINGLE, 
> > 0 },
> > -#define PERFSTATUS_ARRAY( var, name, size )   { name, TYPE_S_ARRAY,  
> > size },
> > +#define PERFCOUNTER( var, name )              { (name), TYPE_SINGLE, 
> > 0 },
> > +#define PERFCOUNTER_ARRAY( var, name, size )  { (name), TYPE_ARRAY,  
> > (size) },
> > +#define PERFSTATUS( var, name )               { (name), 
> > TYPE_S_SINGLE, 0 },
> > +#define PERFSTATUS_ARRAY( var, name, size )   { (name), TYPE_S_ARRAY, 
> >  (size) },
> Same question as for patch 4. Plus if this needed touching, then the 
> stray
> blanks immediately inside the parentheses would please be dropped as 
> well.
Noted

--
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)