[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH for 4.19] automation/eclair: add deviations agreed in MISRA meetings
- To: Oleksii <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:48:33 +0200
- Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx, Simone Ballarin <simone.ballarin@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 08:48:40 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 26/06/24 09:37, Oleksii wrote:
On Tue, 2024-06-25 at 18:59 -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
+-doc_begin="The conversion from a function pointer to unsigned
long or (void *) does not lose any information, provided that the
target type has enough bits to store it."
+-config=MC3R1.R11.1,casts+={safe,
+ "from(type(canonical(__function_pointer_types)))
+ &&to(type(canonical(builtin(unsigned
long)||pointer(builtin(void)))))
+ &&relation(definitely_preserves_value)"
+}
+-doc_end
This one and the ones below are the important ones! I think we should
have them in the tree as soon as possible ideally 4.19. I ask for
a release-ack.
Just want to be sure that I understand deviations properly with this
example.
If the deviation above is merged, then it would be safe from a MISRA
point of view to cast a function pointer to 'unsigned long' or 'void
*', and thereby MISRA won't complain about code with such conversions?
Exactly, taking into account section 4.7 of GCC manual.
--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.
Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
|
