Re: [XEN PATCH 0/5] address violations of MISRA C rules

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 01/06/2024 6:19 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2024-06-01 16:37, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 01/06/2024 11:16 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> Patches 1 to 4 address violations of MISRA C Rule 20.12 by deviating
>>> certain
>>> uses of some macros, while the last patch addresses some regressions
>>> introduced
>>> by the latest bitops series
>>>
>>> Nicola Vetrini (5):
>>>   xen/domain: deviate violation of MISRA C Rule 20.12
>>>   x86/domain: deviate violation of MISRA C Rule 20.12
>>>   x86: deviate violation of MISRA C Rule 20.12
>>>   automation/eclair_analysis: address remaining violations of MISRA C
>>>     Rule 20.12
>>>   xen: fix MISRA regressions on rule 20.9 and 20.12
>>
>> I've committed patch 5 because it fixes a blocking failure in Gitlab CI
>> from content already accepted for Xen 4.19.
>>
>
> Thanks
>
>> The others look fine to me, but you'll need to negotiate with Oleksii
>> (CC'd) to get them in, at this point in the release.
>>
>
> Well, having one more clean rule does look better for Xen, and the
> changes to the codebase are harmless enough, but ultimately given the
> closeness with the deadline I didn't really see a need to.
>
>> Given that this series makes x86 clean to Rule 20.12, shouldn't there be
>> a final patch making it blocking, to bring x86 in line with ARM?
>>
>
> Good point, I should have done that in patch 4. I'll do a follow-up
> patch.

FWIW, given how simple this series is, I'm +1 for including it in 4.19,
even at this point.  It is definitely nicer to have the disposition of
Rule 20.12 the same between ARM and x86.

Still - it's very much Oleksii's call.

~Andrew