Re: [XEN PATCH v4] automation/eclair: extend existing deviations of MISRA C Rule 16.3

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 25.06.2024 08:46, Federico Serafini wrote:
> Update ECLAIR configuration to deviate more cases where an
> unintentional fallthrough cannot happen.
> 
> Tag Rule 16.3 as clean for arm.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>

To add to my reply on the other series: As per above you even acked ...

> --- a/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> +++ b/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> @@ -330,12 +330,34 @@ Deviations related to MISRA C:2012 Rules:
>       - Tagged as `deliberate` for ECLAIR.
>  
>     * - R16.3
> -     - Switch clauses ending with continue, goto, return statements are safe.
> +     - Statements that change the control flow (i.e., break, continue, goto,
> +       return) and calls to functions that do not return the control back are
> +       \"allowed terminal statements\".
>       - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
>  
>     * - R16.3
> -     - Switch clauses ending with a call to a function that does not give
> -       the control back (i.e., a function with attribute noreturn) are safe.
> +     - An if-else statement having both branches ending with one of the 
> allowed
> +       terminal statemets is itself an allowed terminal statements.
> +     - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
> +
> +   * - R16.3
> +     - An if-else statement having an always true condition and the true
> +       branch ending with an allowed terminal statement is itself an allowed
> +       terminal statement.
> +     - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
> +
> +   * - R16.3
> +     - A switch clause ending with a statement expression which, in turn, 
> ends
> +       with an allowed terminal statement (e.g., the expansion of
> +       generate_exception()) is safe.
> +     - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
> +
> +   * - R16.3
> +     - A switch clause ending with a do-while-false the body of which, in 
> turn,
> +       ends with an allowed terminal statement (e.g., PARSE_ERR_RET()) is 
> safe.
> +       An exception to that is the macro ASSERT_UNREACHABLE() which is
> +       effective in debug build only: a switch clause ending with
> +       ASSERT_UNREACHABLE() is not considered safe.
>       - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.

... this explicit statement regarding ASSERT_UNREACHABLE().

Jan