On 14.11.2023 00:58, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 19.10.2023 09:55, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> The constant 0 is used instead of NULL in '__ACCESS_ONCE' as a
>>> compile-time check to detect non-scalar types; its usage for this
>>> purpose is deviated.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, the 'typeof_field' macro is introduced as a general way
>>> to access the type of a struct member without declaring a variable
>>> of struct type. Both this macro and 'sizeof_field' are moved to
>>> 'xen/macros.h'.
>>>
>>> No functional change intended.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetr...@bugseng.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - added entry in deviations.rst
>>> Changes in v3:
>>> - dropped access_field
>>> - moved macro to macros.h
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v4:
>>> - Amend deviation record.
>>> ---
>>> automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl | 9 +++++++++
>>> docs/misra/deviations.rst | 6 ++++++
>>> xen/include/xen/compiler.h | 8 --------
>>> xen/include/xen/kernel.h | 2 +-
>>> xen/include/xen/macros.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> I tried to commit this patch, but ...
>>
>>> diff --git a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
>>> b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
>>> index fa56e5c00a27..28d9c37bedb2 100644
>>> --- a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
>>> +++ b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
>>> @@ -246,6 +246,15 @@ constant expressions are required.\""
>>> "any()"}
>>> -doc_end
>>>
>>> +#
>>> +# Series 11
>>> +#
>>> +
>>> +-doc_begin="This construct is used to check if the type is scalar, and for
>>> this purpose the use of 0 as a null pointer constant is deliberate."
>>> +-config=MC3R1.R11.9,reports+={deliberate,
>>> "any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^__ACCESS_ONCE$))))"
>>> +}
>>> +-doc_end
>>> +
>>> #
>>> # Series 13
>>> #
>>
>> ... this change doesn't apply, and I also can't see how it would. There were
>> no dependencies specified, so it's also not clear on top of which other
>> (ready to be committed) patch(es) this might have been meant to apply. Please
>> resubmit in a shape applicable to the staging branch.
>
> The order doesn't matter in that file, you can place # Series 11 just
> after # Series 10
That would have been one of the possible guesses. Yet then ...
> --- a/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> +++ b/automation/eclair_analysis/ECLAIR/deviations.ecl
> @@ -274,6 +274,15 @@ still non-negative."
> -config=MC3R1.R10.1,etypes+={safe,
> "stmt(operator(logical)||node(conditional_operator||binary_conditional_operator))",
> "dst_type(ebool||boolean)"}
> -doc_end
>
> +#
> +# Series 11
> +#
> +
> +-doc_begin="This construct is used to check if the type is scalar, and for
> this purpose the use of 0 as a null pointer constant is deliberate."
> +-config=MC3R1.R11.9,reports+={deliberate,
> "any_area(any_loc(any_exp(macro(^__ACCESS_ONCE$))))"
> +}
> +-doc_end
> +
> ### Set 3 ###
... there is this grouping by sets as well.
Jan
