Re: [XEN PATCH v3 2/3] xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu-v3.c: fix violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 3.1

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Rahul,

On 05/07/2023 09:40, Rahul Singh wrote:
> > On 4 Jul 2023, at 4:51 pm, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 29.06.2023 16:52, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> > > > On 29 Jun 2023, at 11:06, Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In the file `xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu-v3.c' there are a few occurrences
> > > here you use a different character to enclose the file path (` vs ‘) may I 
> > > suggest to
> > > use only (‘)?
> > >
> > > > of nested '//' character sequences inside C-style comment blocks, which violate
> > > > Rule 3.1.
> > > >
> > > > The patch aims to resolve those by replacing the nested comments with
> > > > equivalent constructs that do not violate the rule.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > You are missing the “---“ here, meaning that the lines below are part of the
> > > commit message and I’m sure you don’t want that.
> > >
> > > Also here, may I suggest to use this commit title instead?
> > > “xen/arm: smmuv3: Fix violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 3.1”
> > Just to mention it: Personally I'm averse to such double subject prefixes.
> > Why would (here) "xen/smmuv3: " not be sufficient (and entirely unambiguous)?
> With the changes suggested above.
There are conflicting suggestions about the title. So it is not clear to 
me which one you are referring to.
I will assume you were happy either way and so picked Luca's proposal 
and committed.
> Acked-by: Rahul Singh <rahul.singh@xxxxxxx>
>
> Regards,
> Rahul
--
Julien Grall