Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] RFC xen: suppress Coverity warnings about atomic_read and atomic_set.

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 15:06 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 12.09.13 at 15:47, Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > RFC because I'm not sure what people think about scattering coverity
> > annotations in the code.
> 
> I personally dislike such tool specific annotations. What if someone
> suggests a second tool to pass our code through? If there was
> some standardization, that'd be a different thing...

Could we handle this how we do different compilers:

#ifdef COVERITY
#define __false_cast_thing THE ANNOTATION
#else...

static inline void atomic_set(atomic_t *v, int i)
{
    __false_cast_thing
    write_atomic(&v->counter, i);

Although if the tools are not consistent about placement etc this won't
help at all.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel