[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: x86/bitops and MISRA C:2012 Rule 5.5
On 15/03/24 12:13, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 15/03/2024 11:07 am, Federico Serafini wrote:Hello everyone, there are violations of Rule 5.5 ("Identifiers shall be distinct from macro names") in xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h. You can see them at [1]. Do you agree to distinguish between function-like macros and inline functions by adding a suffix to the functions?Please see the other bitops thread, which you're also CC'd on. Although it's not got to these functions yet, this is going to be fixed by having set_bit() be common, and arch_set_bit() be the per-arch implemenation. Neither _unsafe nor _nocheck are remotely appropriate here. Thanks, I missed it. -- Federico Serafini, M.Sc. Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |