Re: [PATCH v2] docs/misra: add exceptions to rules

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.08.2023 03:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > During the discussions that led to the acceptable of the Rules, we
> 
> Nit: acceptance
> 
> > decided on a few exceptions that were not properly recorded in
> > rules.rst. Other times, the exceptions were decided later when it came
> > to enabling a rule in ECLAIR.
> > 
> > Either way, update rules.rst with appropriate notes.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx>
> >[...]
> > @@ -239,13 +256,16 @@ maintainers if you want to suggest a change.
> >       - Required
> >       - All declarations of an object or function shall use the same
> >         names and type qualifiers
> > -     -
> > +     - The type ret_t maybe be deliberately used and defined as int or
> > +       long depending on the type of guest to service
> >  
> >     * - `Rule 8.4 
> > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_08_04.c>`_
> >       - Required
> >       - A compatible declaration shall be visible when an object or
> >         function with external linkage is defined
> > -     -
> > +     - Allowed exceptions: asm-offsets.c (definitions for asm modules
> > +       not called from C code), gcov_base.c (definitions only used in
> > +       non-release builds)
> 
> Doesn't this want to be
> 
>      - Allowed exceptions: asm-offsets.c, definitions for asm modules
>        not called from C code, and gcov_base.c (definitions only used in
>        non-release builds)
> 
> ? As to coverage: Why "only used in non-release builds"? COVERAGE doesn't
> depend on DEBUG, and people may actually want to enable it for release
> builds. Just likely not for production ones.
> 
> If you agree with and make respective adjustments:
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

Yes I agree to the changes and I made them on commit