Hello everyone,
I have another question regarding Rule 5.6 ("A `typedef' name shall be
a unique identifier"), this time for X86:
the violations left [1] involve guest_intpte_t, guest_l1e_t and
guest_l2e_t, which seem to be deliberately defined differently depending
on the number of guest paging levels.
I would like to propose a deviation for these types, do you agree?
[1]
https://saas.eclairit.com:3787/fs/var/local/eclair/XEN.ecdf/ECLAIR_normal/staging/X86_64-2023/446/PROJECT.ecd;/by_service/MC3R1.R5.6.html
Regards
--
Federico Serafini, M.Sc.
Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
