On 17.06.2024 11:49, Federico Serafini wrote: > MISRA C Rule 16.4 states that every `switch' statement shall have a > `default' label" and a statement or a comment prior to the > terminating break statement. > > This patch addresses some violations of the rule related to the > "notifier pattern": a frequently-used pattern whereby only a few values > are handled by the switch statement and nothing should be done for > others (nothing to do in the default case). > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <federico.seraf...@bugseng.com>
I guess I shouldn't outright NAK this, but I certainly won't ack it. This is precisely the purely mechanical change that in earlier discussions some (including me) have indicated isn't going to help safety. However, if others want to ack something purely mechanical like this, then my minimal requirement would be that somewhere it is spelled out what falls under > --- > xen/arch/arm/cpuerrata.c | 1 + > xen/arch/arm/gic.c | 1 + > xen/arch/arm/irq.c | 4 ++++ giv-v3-lpi.c has a similar instance, yet you don't adjust that. This may be because that possibly is the one where it was previously indicated that it may in fact be a mistake that the dying/dead case isn't handled, but then at the very least I'd have expected that you explicitly mention cases where the adjustment is (deliberately) not made. Jan
