On 30/06/2023 8:36 am, Federico Serafini wrote: > 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.
As a general note - if you need to make multiple changes like this, it's far better to do them as a single patch. The end result tends to be easier to review, and it reduces the textural dependencies between the various patches floating about on list. ~Andrew
