Re: [XEN PATCH] automation/eclair: configure Rule 13.6 and custom service B.UNEVALEFF

[Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 22/06/24 14:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 22/06/2024 11:48 am, Federico Serafini wrote:
> > diff --git a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl 
> > b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> > index e2653f77eb..6bdfe7c883 100644
> > --- a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> > +++ b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> > @@ -328,6 +328,16 @@ of the short-circuit evaluation strategy of such logical 
> > operators."
> >   -config=MC3R1.R13.5,reports+={disapplied,"any()"}
> >   -doc_end
> >   
> > +-doc_begin="Macros alternative_v?call[0-9] use sizeof and typeof to check that th argument types match the corresponding parameter ones."
> Typo "th" => "the".  Can be fixed on commit.
>
> > +-config=MC3R1.R13.6,reports+={deliberate,"any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^alternative_vcall[0-9]$))&&file(^xen/arch/x86.*$)))"}
> > +-config=B.UNEVALEFF,reports+={deliberate,"any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^alternative_v?call[0-9]$))&&file(^xen/arch/x86.*$)))"}
> There will be expansions of these macros outside of arch/x86/.
> drivers/iommu/ as an example.
>
> Is the file() clause targetting the source of the macro (in which it
> probably wants making more specific to alternative_call.h), or the
> expansions of the macro (in which case it probably wants dropping
> entirely) ?
It is targetting the source of the macro,
we can make it more specific.


> > +-doc_end
> > +
> > +-doc_begin="Macro chk_fld is only used to introduce BUILD_BUG_ON checks in 
> > very specific cases where the usage is correct and can be checked by code inspection.
> > +The BUILD_BUG_ON checks check that EFI_TIME and struct xenpf_efi_time fields 
> > match."
> > +-config=MC3R1.R13.6,reports+={deliberate,"any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^chk_fld$))&&file(^xen/common/efi/runtime\\.c$)))"}
> > +-doc_end
> It's just occurred to me.  Anything, no matter how complicated, inside a
> BUILD_BUG_ON() is clearly a compile time thing so has no relevant side
> effects.
>
> Is it possible to generally exclude any sizeof/alignof/typeof inside a
> BUILD_BUG_ON()?  That would be better than identifying every user locally.
Sure.

I will send a v2 with your observations.

--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.

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