On 13/06/23 11:44, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 13/06/2023 09:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.06.2023 09:42, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
The xen sources contain several violations of Rule 3.1 from MISRA
C:2012,
whose headline states:
"The character sequences '/*' and '//' shall not be used within a
comment".
Most of the violations are due to the presence of links to webpages
within
C-style comment blocks, such as:
xen/arch/arm/include/asm/smccc.h:37.1-41.3
/*
* This file provides common defines for ARM SMC Calling Convention as
* specified in
*
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.den0028a/index.html
*/
In this case, we propose to deviate all of these occurrences with a
project deviation to be captured by a tool configuration.
There are, however, a few other violations that do not fall under this
category, namely:
1. in file "xen/arch/arm/include/asm/arm64/flushtlb.h" we propose to
avoid the usage of a nested comment;
2. in file "xen/common/xmalloc_tlsf.c" we propose to substitute the
commented-out if statement with a "#if 0 .. #endif;
3. in file "xen/include/xen/atomic.h" and
"xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu-v3.c" we propose to split the C-style
comment containing the nested comment into two doxygen comments,
clearly
identifying the second as a code sample. This can then be captured
with a
project deviation by a tool configuration.
Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetr...@bugseng.com>
---
Changes:
- Resending the patch with the right maintainers in CC.
But without otherwise addressing comments already given, afaics. One
more
remark:
--- a/xen/common/xmalloc_tlsf.c
+++ b/xen/common/xmalloc_tlsf.c
@@ -140,9 +140,10 @@ static inline void MAPPING_SEARCH(unsigned long
*r, int *fl, int *sl)
*fl = flsl(*r) - 1;
*sl = (*r >> (*fl - MAX_LOG2_SLI)) - MAX_SLI;
*fl -= FLI_OFFSET;
- /*if ((*fl -= FLI_OFFSET) < 0) // FL will be always >0!
- *fl = *sl = 0;
- */
+#if 0
+ if ((*fl -= FLI_OFFSET) < 0) // FL will be always >0!
+ fl = *sl = 0;
You want to get indentation right here, and you don't want to lose
the indirection on fl.
+#endif
*r &= ~t;
}
}
If you split this to 4 patches, leaving the URL proposal in just
the cover letter, then I think this one change (with the adjustments)
could go in right away. Similarly I expect the arm64/flushtlb.h
change could be ack-ed right away by an Arm maintainer.
I actually dislike the proposal. In this case, the code is meant to
look like assembly code. I would replace the // with ;. Also, I would
like to keep the comment style in sync in arm32/flushtlb.h. So can
this be updated as well?
Cheers,
Hi, Julien.
I'm not authorized to send patches about files in the arm32 tree, but
surely the patch can be easily replicated in any place where it makes
sense for consistency.
Regards,
Nicola
