Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] xen/device_tree: fix Eclair findings for MISRA C 2012 Rule 20.7

[Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Luca,

On 06/02/2023 15:31, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Xenia,
> 
>> On 3 Feb 2023, at 19:09, Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>>  - the fixes are based solely to Eclair findings (the tool has been
>>    adjusted to report only those violations that can result to a bug)
>>  - reflect this in the commit title
>>
>> xen/include/xen/device_tree.h | 14 +++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/device_tree.h b/xen/include/xen/device_tree.h
>> index a28937d12ae8..7839a199e311 100644
>> --- a/xen/include/xen/device_tree.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/device_tree.h
>> @@ -37,11 +37,11 @@ struct dt_device_match {
>>     const void *data;
>> };
>>
>> -#define __DT_MATCH_PATH(p)              .path = p
>> -#define __DT_MATCH_TYPE(typ)            .type = typ
>> -#define __DT_MATCH_COMPATIBLE(compat)   .compatible = compat
>> +#define __DT_MATCH_PATH(p)              .path = (p)
>> +#define __DT_MATCH_TYPE(typ)            .type = (typ)
>> +#define __DT_MATCH_COMPATIBLE(compat)   .compatible = (compat)
>> #define __DT_MATCH_NOT_AVAILABLE()      .not_available = 1
>> -#define __DT_MATCH_PROP(p)              .prop = p
>> +#define __DT_MATCH_PROP(p)              .prop = (p)
>>
>> #define DT_MATCH_PATH(p)                { __DT_MATCH_PATH(p) }
>> #define DT_MATCH_TYPE(typ)              { __DT_MATCH_TYPE(typ) }
>> @@ -226,13 +226,13 @@ dt_find_interrupt_controller(const struct 
>> dt_device_match *matches);
>> #define DT_ROOT_NODE_SIZE_CELLS_DEFAULT 1
>>
>> #define dt_for_each_property_node(dn, pp)                   \
>> -    for ( pp = dn->properties; pp != NULL; pp = pp->next )
>> +    for ( pp = (dn)->properties; (pp) != NULL; pp = (pp)->next )
>>
>> #define dt_for_each_device_node(dt, dn)                     \
>> -    for ( dn = dt; dn != NULL; dn = dn->allnext )
>> +    for ( dn = dt; (dn) != NULL; dn = (dn)->allnext )
>>
>> #define dt_for_each_child_node(dt, dn)                      \
>> -    for ( dn = dt->child; dn != NULL; dn = dn->sibling )
>> +    for ( dn = (dt)->child; (dn) != NULL; dn = (dn)->sibling )
>>
>> /* Helper to read a big number; size is in cells (not bytes) */
>> static inline u64 dt_read_number(const __be32 *cell, int size)
>> --
>> 2.37.2
>>
>>
> 
> While the changes looks sensible to me, I’ve had a look in eclair but I was 
> unable to find the findings,
> here what findings I have in the latest report:
> https://eclairit.com:8443/job/XEN/Target=ARM64,agent=docker1/lastBuild/eclair/packageName.832204620/fileName.1811675806/

Eclair does not report violations at the definition but rather at the use.
Check domain_build.c for example to see the reports for 20.7 related to these 
macros.

~Michal