[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH v2] docs/misra: document the C dialect and translation toolchain assumptions.
- To: Roberto Bagnara <roberto.bagnara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:27:14 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=E9b566oxwptVCUtRBZ3IJydX6QQjKXMYzCi7wsM2nhM=; b=KL+lm+LHNigmY2HTOtk0Su0WmvwmfOj0xgG799Ym+2AM4jSb/FFxIiPhM0uiuvp0+5OlQHVLkiV/HXO1QicCFr6D15VvQZuE4aGRx/eQ5rvBC6apDu0i+D2fkDAbAqcztCS8b7nABKjUju1IINZCtMIhzgrMAUosIt94QDNm0+hhS2nee8ZSlaJdcwGvaDJ14eGiiUNVYxnsj3Dcc797dLBeqj6Q4vNSCMTebqOYNWFNQwLfUhJsTh4id3MiCIXrRqC3xM5QctbLK0gSeJ4zktzjq2J0ldcQU9D5dDP6Fqkv6A+R3UzdzAlaUP+U/Y+95KaZvDMqsQ8zupQOcMa6Dw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SVdu6LNPbteYd/JHDGFC8qzCh76eGFm7fYsuqi5EM+/nQNsEsDZIlkhhmqZC2ulJVMAe84AEW+PbzKfVTNCoKHUwzcZefimZwOSZ/FeLj69HO7NVQm4DEfZmy6o/DzQx4sA39l228tn+mWqUyoB9NHHiSvTytNV7jM1zR4zMnQ5QmnIaglmfXxFsVJ4mACil6ea08kkCUVNO+Lizq3mqPHzWbpBHcJirZI9QPwGydx5a1zOcNqoAzMHcBKnX0RJ1A95LsBRjmRa9wnYKrwufhgVRpXRVPtXqeYNs27S6i7DscaResiycUrvrsb3EiFkhQF5mp+SzR9Ax4hNa0TDG+Q==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx, bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx, michal.orzel@xxxxxxx, xenia.ragiadakou@xxxxxxx, ayan.kumar.halder@xxxxxxx, consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:27:31 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 20.06.2023 14:10, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> + * - static function is used in an inline function with external linkage
> + - ARM64, X86_64
> + - Non-documented GCC extension. An inline function with external linkage
> + can be inlined everywhere. If that calls a static functions, which is
> + not available everywhere, it is a constraint violation according to
> + C99 6.7.4p3: "An inline definition of a function with external linkage
> + shall not contain a definition of a modifiable object with static
> + storage duration, and shall not contain a reference to an identifier
> + with internal linkage." A standard-compliant C compiler ought
> + to diagnose all constraint violations: when it does not, as is the
> + case for GCC, the behavior is implicitly undefined.
With _spin_lock_cb() taken care of, do we have any left? Or else can this
be dropped?
Jan
|
