> On 19 Jun 2023, at 09:50, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 19/06/2023 09:31, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>> On 19 Jun 2023, at 09:23, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19/06/2023 09:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.06.2023 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola
On 19/06/2023 09:31, Luca Fancellu wrote:
On 19 Jun 2023, at 09:23, Julien Grall wrote:
On 19/06/2023 09:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.06.2023 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola
> On 19 Jun 2023, at 09:23, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 19/06/2023 09:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.06.2023 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
>> while inv
On 19/06/2023 09:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.06.2023 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
found the followin
On 16.06.2023 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
found the following pattern, that is likely to r
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
> > > while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
> > > found the following pattern, that is likely to results in a lot possible
> > > positives from ma
On 16/06/23 09:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
found the following pattern, that is likely to results in a lot possible
positives from many (all) static analysis tools for this rule.
This is the cu
On 15.06.2023 18:39, nicola wrote:
> while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
> found the following pattern, that is likely to results in a lot possible
> positives from many (all) static analysis tools for this rule.
>
> This is the current status (taken from `xen/comm
Hi all,
while investigating possible patches regarding Mandatory Rule 9.1, I
found the following pattern, that is likely to results in a lot possible
positives from many (all) static analysis tools for this rule.
This is the current status (taken from `xen/common/device_tree.c:135')
const stru
