[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 0/9] MISRA C 2012 8.1 rule fixes
Hi Jan, On 22.06.2022 12:25, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 20.06.2022 09:02, Michal Orzel wrote: >> This series fixes all the findings for MISRA C 2012 8.1 rule, reported by >> cppcheck 2.7 with misra addon, for Arm (arm32/arm64 - target allyesconfig). >> Fixing this rule comes down to replacing implicit 'unsigned' with explicit >> 'unsigned int' type as there are no other violations being part of that rule >> in the Xen codebase. > > I'm puzzled, I have to admit. While I agree with all the examples in the > doc, I notice that there's no instance of "signed" or "unsigned" there. > Which matches my understanding that "unsigned" and "signed" on their own > (just like "long") are proper types, and hence the omission of "int" > there is not an "omission of an explicit type". > Cppcheck was choosed as a tool for MISRA checking and it is considering it as a violation. It treats unsigned as an implicit type. You can see this flag in cppcheck source code: "fIsImplicitInt = (1U << 31), // Is "int" token implicitly added?" > Nevertheless I think we have had the intention to use "unsigned int" > everywhere, but simply for cosmetic / style reasons (while I didn't ever > see anyone request the use of "long int" in place of "long", despite it > also being possible to combine with "double"), so I'm happy to see this > being changed. Just that (for now) I don't buy the justification. > > Jan Cheers, Michal
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |