On 2024-03-12 12:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.03.2024 12:13, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
Rule 20.4 states: "A macro shall not be defined with the same name
as a keyword".
Defining this macro with the same name as the inline keyword
allows for additionally checking that out-of-lined static inline
functions end up in the correct section while minimizing churn and
has a positive impact on the overall safety. See [1] for additional
context on the motivation of this deviation.
No functional change.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/adaa6d55-266d-4df8-8967-9340080d1...@citrix.com/
Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetr...@bugseng.com>
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
with ...
--- a/docs/misra/deviations.rst
+++ b/docs/misra/deviations.rst
@@ -322,6 +322,12 @@ Deviations related to MISRA C:2012 Rules:
- /\* Fallthrough \*/
- /\* Fallthrough. \*/
+ * - R20.4
+ - The override of the keyword \"inline\" in xen/compiler.h is
present so
+ that section contents checks pass when the compiler chooses
not to
+ inline a particular function.
... padding (1st line of this bullet point) and indentation (2nd and
3rd
lines) adjusted to what's used elsewhere, including e.g ...
Yeah, sorry.
+ - Comment-based deviation.
+
* - R20.7
- Code violating Rule 20.7 is safe when macro parameters are
used:
(1) as function arguments;
... here. Happy to do so while committing.
Thanks,
--
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)
