On 13/02/2025 1:25 am, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Hi all, > > I am looking through the few remaining MISRA violations that we have > left. One of them is R11.2: > > https://saas.eclairit.com:3787/fs/var/local/eclair/xen-project.ecdf/xen-project/hardware/xen/ECLAIR_normal/staging/X86_64/9118578464/PROJECT.ecd;/by_service/MC3A2.R11.2.html#{%22select%22:true,%22selection%22:{%22hiddenAreaKinds%22:[],%22hiddenSubareaKinds%22:[],%22show%22:false,%22selector%22:{%22enabled%22:true,%22negated%22:true,%22kind%22:0,%22domain%22:%22kind%22,%22inputs%22:[{%22enabled%22:true,%22text%22:%22violation%22}]}}} > > Specifically, mctelem_cookie_t is a pointer to incomplete type and > therefore COOKIE2MCTE triggers a "conversion between a pointer to an > incomplete type and any other type". > > mctelem_cookie_t is defined as: > > typedef struct mctelem_cookie *mctelem_cookie_t; > > I am looking through the code and I genuinely cannot find the definition > of struct mctelem_cookie. > > If mctelem_cookie_t is only used as a pointer, wouldn't it make more > sense to do: > > typedef struct mctelem_ent *mctelem_cookie_t; > > ? > > What am I missing?
Nothing. Or perhaps the twisted thinking of the original author. It is genuinely a pointer type (== known size) which you can't deference (because there is no definition), and can only operate on by casting to an integer. Except the code also requires it to be a uint64_t which is why there's some fun disabling of relevant hypercalls for compat guests. If someone could find the time to file it in /dev/null and replace it with literally anything else, I'd be very thankful. ~Andrew
