On 14.03.2024 08:20, Juergen Gross wrote:
> In xen spinlock code there are several violations of MISRA rule 21.1
> (identifiers starting with "__" or "_[A-Z]").
>
> Fix them by using trailing underscores instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>
I can live with the changes as they are, but before giving an ack, I'd
still like to ask if the moved underscores are really useful / necessary
in all cases. E.g.
> --- a/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ union lock_debug {
> bool unseen:1;
> };
> };
> -#define _LOCK_DEBUG { .val = LOCK_DEBUG_INITVAL }
> +#define LOCK_DEBUG_ { .val = LOCK_DEBUG_INITVAL }
... for an internal helper macro it may indeed be better to have a
trailing one here, but ...
> @@ -95,27 +95,27 @@ struct lock_profile_qhead {
> int32_t idx; /* index for printout */
> };
>
> -#define _LOCK_PROFILE(lockname) { .name = #lockname, .lock = &(lockname), }
> -#define _LOCK_PROFILE_PTR(name)
> \
> - static struct lock_profile * const __lock_profile_##name
> \
> +#define LOCK_PROFILE_(lockname) { .name = #lockname, .lock = &(lockname), }
> +#define LOCK_PROFILE_PTR_(name)
> \
> + static struct lock_profile * const lock_profile__##name
> \
... I'm not entirely convinced of the need for the double infix ones
here ...
> -#define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED _SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(NULL)
> +#define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED_(NULL)
> #define DEFINE_SPINLOCK(l)
> \
> - spinlock_t l = _SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(NULL);
> \
> - static struct lock_profile __lock_profile_data_##l = _LOCK_PROFILE(l);
> \
> - _LOCK_PROFILE_PTR(l)
> + spinlock_t l = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED_(NULL);
> \
> + static struct lock_profile lock_profile_data__##l = LOCK_PROFILE_(l);
> \
.... and here.
Jan
