Hello Stefano,
On 29/06/23 21:47, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023, Federico Serafini wrote:
Change the parameter names of function declarations to be consistent
with the names used in the corresponding function definitions
so as to fix violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.3.
Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <federico.seraf...@bugseng.com>
---
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vmcs.h b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vmcs.h
index d07fcb2bc9..24bf409d8f 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vmcs.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vmcs.h
@@ -656,10 +656,10 @@ bool vmx_msr_is_intercepted(struct vmx_msr_bitmap
*msr_bitmap,
unsigned int msr, bool is_write) __nonnull(1);
void virtual_vmcs_enter(const struct vcpu *);
void virtual_vmcs_exit(const struct vcpu *);
-u64 virtual_vmcs_vmread(const struct vcpu *, u32 encoding);
+u64 virtual_vmcs_vmread(const struct vcpu *, u32 vmcs_encoding);
Shouldn't the first parameter be "v" to match the definition?
Or is that a different MISRA C rule?
This is a violation of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.2:
"function types shall be in prototype form with named parameters".
However, I can propose a new patch version to fix it as well.
enum vmx_insn_errno virtual_vmcs_vmread_safe(const struct vcpu *v,
u32 vmcs_encoding, u64 *val);
-void virtual_vmcs_vmwrite(const struct vcpu *, u32 encoding, u64 val);
+void virtual_vmcs_vmwrite(const struct vcpu *, u32 vmcs_encoding, u64 val);
same here
enum vmx_insn_errno virtual_vmcs_vmwrite_safe(const struct vcpu *v,
u32 vmcs_encoding, u64 val);
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vvmx.h b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vvmx.h
index dc9db69258..1e4bbc0d78 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vvmx.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vmx/vvmx.h
@@ -144,9 +144,9 @@ enum vvmcs_encoding_type {
VVMCS_TYPE_HSTATE,
};
-u64 get_vvmcs_virtual(void *vvmcs, u32 encoding);
+u64 get_vvmcs_virtual(void *vvmcs, u32 vmcs_encoding);
This one should return uint64_t to match the definition. Or is that a
different MISRA C rule?
This is a violation of the same rule (8.3) but the focus of this patch
series was intended to be on be only on parameter names.
I can propose a new version of the patch to also address the additional
violations discussed.
u64 get_vvmcs_real(const struct vcpu *, u32 encoding);
-void set_vvmcs_virtual(void *vvmcs, u32 encoding, u64 val);
+void set_vvmcs_virtual(void *vvmcs, u32 vmcs_encoding, u64 val);
This one should be:
void set_vvmcs_virtual(void *vvmcs, uint32_t vmcs_encoding, uint64_t val)
Other than these, everything else checks out
Regards
--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.
Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
