Re: SAF-x-safe rename

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2023, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> > On 5 Oct 2023, at 00:46, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi MISRA C working group (Jan, Roger, Andrew, Julien, Bertrand, George)
> > 
> > in a recent thread Andrew pointed out that the SAF-2-safe tag is
> > confusing and requested a rename:
> > https://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=169634970821202
> > 
> > As documented by docs/misra/documenting-violations.rst:
> > 
> > - SAF-X-safe: This tag means that the next line of code contains a finding, 
> > but
> >   the non compliance to the checker is analysed and demonstrated to be safe.
> > - SAF-X-false-positive-<tool>: This tag means that the next line of code
> >   contains a finding, but the finding is a bug of the tool.
> > 
> > 
> > Today we have already 28 instances of SAF tags in the Xen codebase.
> > 
> > 
> > Andrew suggested "ANALYSIS" instead of SAF so I would imagine:
> > - ANALYSIS-X-safe
> > - ANALYSIS-X-false-positive-<tool>
> > 
> > If we really want a rename I suggest to rename SAF to SAFE:
> > - SAFE-X-safe
> > - SAFE-X-false-positive-<tool>
> > 
> > Or maybe MISRA:
> > - MISRA-X-safe
> > - MISRA-X-false-positive-<tool>
> > 
> > But I actually prefer to keep the tag as it is today.
> 
> We chose a generic name instead of MISRA because the tag can potentially 
> suppress findings
> of any checker, including MISRA checker.
> 
> If SAF-* is confusing, what about FUSA-* ?
> 
> Anyway I’m thinking that every name we could come up will be confusing at 
> first, improving the
> documentation would mitigate it (by improving I mean to improve the fruition 
> of it, for example a
> Read the docs documentation has the search bar, a quick copy paste of SAF- 
> would make the
> documenting-violations page visible.)

I agree, that's why my preference is to keep it as is (and improve the
docs). Even today if you grep for SAF under docs/ you can find what's
what.


> > 
> > If you have any naming suggestions please let me know by Oct 11. After
> > that, I plan to run a Doodle poll to check the preference of the group.