[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN PATCH v2 06/13] xen/efi: fix violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 7.2
On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 06.07.2023 01:37, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2023, Simone Ballarin wrote: > >> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c > >> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c > >> @@ -34,13 +34,13 @@ > >> #define EFI_REVISION(major, minor) (((major) << 16) | (minor)) > >> > >> #define SMBIOS3_TABLE_GUID \ > >> - { 0xf2fd1544, 0x9794, 0x4a2c, {0x99, 0x2e, 0xe5, 0xbb, 0xcf, 0x20, > >> 0xe3, 0x94} } > >> + { 0xf2fd1544U, 0x9794U, 0x4a2cU, {0x99U, 0x2eU, 0xe5U, 0xbbU, 0xcfU, > >> 0x20U, 0xe3U, 0x94U} } > >> #define SHIM_LOCK_PROTOCOL_GUID \ > >> - { 0x605dab50, 0xe046, 0x4300, {0xab, 0xb6, 0x3d, 0xd8, 0x10, 0xdd, > >> 0x8b, 0x23} } > >> + { 0x605dab50U, 0xe046U, 0x4300U, {0xabU, 0xb6U, 0x3dU, 0xd8U, 0x10U, > >> 0xddU, 0x8bU, 0x23U} } > >> #define APPLE_PROPERTIES_PROTOCOL_GUID \ > >> - { 0x91bd12fe, 0xf6c3, 0x44fb, { 0xa5, 0xb7, 0x51, 0x22, 0xab, 0x30, > >> 0x3a, 0xe0} } > >> + { 0x91bd12feU, 0xf6c3U, 0x44fbU, { 0xa5U, 0xb7U, 0x51U, 0x22U, 0xabU, > >> 0x30U, 0x3aU, 0xe0U} } > >> #define EFI_SYSTEM_RESOURCE_TABLE_GUID \ > >> - { 0xb122a263, 0x3661, 0x4f68, {0x99, 0x29, 0x78, 0xf8, 0xb0, 0xd6, > >> 0x21, 0x80} } > >> + { 0xb122a263U, 0x3661U, 0x4f68U, {0x99U, 0x29U, 0x78U, 0xf8U, 0xb0U, > >> 0xd6U, 0x21U, 0x80U} } > >> #define EFI_SYSTEM_RESOURCE_TABLE_FIRMWARE_RESOURCE_VERSION 1 > > > > To be honest in these case I don't know if this is better or if it is > > better to add U only to the first numbers (0xf2fd1544U, 0x605dab50U, > > 0x91bd12feU, 0xb122a263U). > > I'd prefer the latter, but I wonder whether that's in the spirit of Misra. My understanding is that MISRA only requests U to be added where actually needed. Everything else is up to us and our desire (or not) for consistency.
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |