Re: [XEN PATCH v2] xen/sched: mechanical renaming to address MISRA C:2012 Rule 5.3

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 25.07.2023 11:08, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> @@ -99,14 +99,15 @@ static void sched_set_affinity(
>      struct sched_unit *unit, const cpumask_t *hard, const cpumask_t *soft);
>  
>  static struct sched_resource *cf_check
> -sched_idle_res_pick(const struct scheduler *ops, const struct sched_unit 
> *unit)
> +sched_idle_res_pick(
> +    const struct scheduler *ops, const struct sched_unit *unit)
>  {
>      return unit->res;
>  }
>  
>  static void *cf_check
> -sched_idle_alloc_udata(const struct scheduler *ops, struct sched_unit *unit,
> -                       void *dd)
> +sched_idle_alloc_udata(
> +    const struct scheduler *ops, struct sched_unit *unit, void *dd)
>  {
>      /* Any non-NULL pointer is fine here. */
>      return ZERO_BLOCK_PTR;

These look like stray changes, presumably resulting from you not fully
undoing earlier changes.

> --- a/xen/common/sched/credit2.c
> +++ b/xen/common/sched/credit2.c
> @@ -3809,7 +3809,8 @@ csched2_dump(const struct scheduler *ops)
>      struct list_head *iter_sdom;
>      struct csched2_private *prv = csched2_priv(ops);
>      unsigned long flags;
> -    unsigned int j, loop;
> +    unsigned int loop;
> +    int j;

This looks like a stray change too, just that it's unclear where it is
coming from.

> @@ -3884,7 +3885,7 @@ csched2_dump(const struct scheduler *ops)
>      list_for_each_entry ( rqd, &prv->rql, rql )
>      {
>          struct list_head *iter, *runq = &rqd->runq;
> -        int loop = 0;
> +        loop = 0;
>  
>          /* We need the lock to scan the runqueue. */
>          spin_lock(&rqd->lock);

With the switch from declaration to statement, a blank line wants
inserting (to separate the remaining declaration from the
statements).

Jan