[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 09/12] x86/shadow: Rework write_atomic() call in shadow_write_entries()
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 13:35:01 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; bugseng.com; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=162.55.131.47
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; d=bugseng.com; s=openarc; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1772022902; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:X-Sender:Organization:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=znqnJrtIOyr/QtKkKeAfBwT9ebqzScXUuCOsjJDtjg4=; b=IQJ/B/1KjusLYznG8b8HBfIf38+8fGNX/B7nPL/FSJzcTWKYy7QNuuyh3y93ixzVncz/ E0iDD768t9zFj1Ica4/dFKzmjs1ENh0sIB1w6mRKmcblFfzN3S9MEcgqP8KYVb8Eiq7HE 1UMI/oO6l4+hKQEhhxDhRITuGKPiMmNix3dPR30X6IoMd8QOtsOiWj+QqIxVQO4fPKr/8 I9NK7g0+9indW3ADpVEqsS/FnOmZmHXh7VszrlQRFjk0xLnquVQxui3f4LELI+JjqiGvM Onl/BQpWJr2yQki4txR1CoIFpx8WWnfOO7trfX1+XpK9L8BLyuHtz7ZPboP3YmcQRmWvM Edij146cxiC8KFOyRpiK83WHMcCiVN+b9OeKAt2etEHISdaO1KYNOw9zpBFfsXRocSTO2 /FkpxbcRkJwq/Gb4lBmgcVOhiN7ZtNWRV8jXNvfuvPaQcl8FBEmWcmeJF2aXUJwVlAJiN LM2W9S5aw8Mz5h0QXJYIMVv+grtZgIcaGiVz3Qsx0MUb8eQhl7bpsSp2mJp7eIOcvp1Ow W9Kv2AMOW9XhzuaCK8vqbr2wj2sVkSXsZY8JmNideqFsFv44iYvZP9VC5tmJKIhb2c5TQ OJ7PB6ZAXDBTjPIcN0pvUaSjEcuCBHuQieKrc2ginxBxpLuEDDT4HA9wKzmwvXw=
- Arc-seal: i=1; d=bugseng.com; s=openarc; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1772022902; b=z78SpsQta1Q96z6M+sWz48bqMi6Zik8KG8fXOUE1uE7L5c0YBlwdlyb+B2epNwPY4EZn R7vak7FVR1YUYo8W/3yloDkR8CZQNWxS0XDgQP2KCjZbui1v7Gbja7nAgUAehsq89S//F 0QiQsjLTRSMEUX+WsH1x3CGRVVs6bFkjFOZbCQSfUh20kGzVTY0mn3jHRCnxJkq30uEXM VO/auXcE4YckwosD22vDRUBuQrqepzwFmWzVoebNytjrDKRJkAklA1Jqxfp34MIQJ+dvw 3/jGRD9BcnqalQ2O2RxyXHnLwXDu4iBw9QQelGNXiHByYr5WU7LSi2h3HK6ylh1ABIjFJ +qWy/aLRJY2B/VNq2Ue9mg6fN6dJo5ax75AZb1niNpPSFzC3P0IFbZJqM/QZavoCxj5cv VWJpBB27WICgXCs5mKkc/wDRZaVC30YaYeCaFPTxBCJvrC+xe0ZrfEnYUINe7KriR+hQa ZiC7CVBOghX3YEbHpWFYxCOAxcxMVV3JOeTWermAWGGHFcZ00UYJeHNwKVESNUu5wy7FI i7AIKhRsFmPTpVqEBG5r4S2dmDnnVYDZ/PBwcocMQEbOJNuhR/sTed9GRRiDy77T7qIBv j24fTY72RBF0bYwZUn9iKB0bNUtdtW+iQYC1hGWp/uinTPQbdDu4FTuJKua7gAM=
- Authentication-results: bugseng.com; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=162.55.131.47
- Cc: Roberto Bagnara <roberto.bagnara@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, "consulting @ bugseng . com" <consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 12:35:25 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 2026-02-25 13:14, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 23/02/2026 7:26 am, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
On 20/02/26 22:46, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Eclair complains of a side effect in a sizeof() expression (R13.6).
I disagree with comments of the form "Eclair complains"
We use the same phrasing with other tools too, but I can change it to
"reports" which I suppose is a more neutral term.
Note that in recent versions of MISRA C that rule is no longer
mandatory. More generally, note also that, IMHO, switching to
a more modern version of MISRA C would simplify compliance.
Ok. Making things simpler for compliance sounds like a good thing.
What would this entail?
Presumably we've got to adapt to all changes in this newer revision of
MISRA C.
~Andrew
Most likely new violations on new non-clean guidelines, generally rules
for features that were standardized in C11/C18 and were previously
widely available extensions (e.g. _Noreturn, _Alignof, threads, ...),
alongside some minor changes in existing ones, such as the
classification change mentioned by Roberto. The exact impact depends on
the target MISRA revision, however. Making an experiment should be only
a matter of s/MC3A2/MC4/ (or whichever MISRA revision is chosen: MC4 in
ECLAIR refers to the latest published MISRA revision, that is, MISRA
C:2025. Perhaps also a few regressions (as in newly introduced
violations) on clean ones, but I do not expect the results to be
radically different.
Side note here: are the efforts to make Xen compile with -stc=c11/gnu11
still ongoing? I say this because any MISRA revision other than the one
currently used by Xen by default is based on C11, as it introduces
guidelines for C11/C18 features. Not that this would matter a whole lot
for Xen, but it is something to consider in the broader picture.
--
Nicola Vetrini, B.Sc.
Software Engineer
BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicola-vetrini-a42471253
|
