[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH][for-next][for-4.19 v2 1/8] xen/include: add macro LOWEST_BIT
- To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Luca Fancellu <Luca.Fancellu@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:13:27 +0000
- Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=ERDxOXiZz7Oa2qagXONdttbfInGFqIn9hprZgcUwVak=; b=Rntxf1eAfs/1wovpQbNBqiseULumFn19XydQSKTd8yWUm7jg1rD17Lh23nRO8nhiF3k1SDCbO4jexm7HgMLw7x2cywKbl9pOcsZyjRt4eCnUz4JSWatmjl9B1DPMOh2Aqh1Sr3GaH6hwEbfy3ABfI0YFkdO1CeXtBQkRSzRDtSffC1luKU4Bqe0OJ6BELrtb9LXWFMktlcsS00yhSsCu4LZfUCLgVhV9S1LvQJUIJxdMacem8pjoWXMAYUz6Btabsuypu3hetPK7v09Akia68dNf3vsIyX2YiMWvOvDcA53/wukIV8ZOJGLvvqSgy6f75OsYyFW2ezw2j2l0IZlRcA==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=BNObe2IMXUBDmlAQaPDqCoo8EdyUgpfwg+2L9nts5jvvVmVllsrFTfDcDaklreczLkX6Iztft2AntguC8WSb/5+gzGwjvLQwWq6UI/P6KKbXPvSEQ8hiXXyqoNLCofmU9ccdbthzkLvhkNEqiOXBlNdlnd3Z8gH8tvjHyORbiO/Zd5wO+MNqx9nvmkvtCs1p2wpf5xOlRfTEVGK/UR9/Ugm+Sr9cHI2HxWRqn6T6rTTMLc1Fyds5VmTzsMNye9SoWws92AmJLRAWxHXZGFgN+eo6h6CjgSnW/Lpk19WaNgXbF72OIQwl6G5Xi3bbXBQxBy3bCd16/flp6AJLIQOfzA==
- Authentication-results-original: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Cc: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, "michal.orzel@xxxxxxx" <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, "xenia.ragiadakou@xxxxxxx" <xenia.ragiadakou@xxxxxxx>, "ayan.kumar.halder@xxxxxxx" <ayan.kumar.halder@xxxxxxx>, "consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx" <consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx" <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx" <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Simone Ballarin <simone.ballarin@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:14:46 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Nodisclaimer: true
- Original-authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Thread-index: AQHaAsacg3neJ95wsUGZXLbST/LDOrBSqNIA
- Thread-topic: [XEN PATCH][for-next][for-4.19 v2 1/8] xen/include: add macro LOWEST_BIT
> On 19 Oct 2023, at 20:58, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +Luca
>
>>>>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/macros.h
>>>>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/macros.h
>>>>>> @@ -8,8 +8,10 @@
>>>>>> #define DIV_ROUND(n, d) (((n) + (d) / 2) / (d))
>>>>>> #define DIV_ROUND_UP(n, d) (((n) + (d) - 1) / (d))
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -#define MASK_EXTR(v, m) (((v) & (m)) / ((m) & -(m)))
>>>>>> -#define MASK_INSR(v, m) (((v) * ((m) & -(m))) & (m))
>>>>>
>>>>> a SAF-<n>-safe comment here?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One reason is that now that violations only belonging to tool
>>>> configurations
>>>> and similar are documented in docs/misra/deviations.rst (committed in
>>>> Stefano's
>>>> branch for-4.19 [1]).
>>>
>>> But tool configuration means every analysis tool needs configuring
>>> separately. That's why the comment tagging scheme was decided to be
>>> preferred, iirc.
>>>
>>>> Also, there were disagreements on the SAF naming
>>>> scheme, and
>>>> patches like those would not be accepted at the moment.
>>>
>>> Well, that needs resolving. The naming there shouldn't lead to patches
>>> being accepted that later may need redoing.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>
>> While this is true, in this case I'm not willing to deviate with a SAF, given
>> that
>> some ECLAIR-specific configuration would be needed anyways, given that I'm
>> deviating a macro definition, rather than the line where it's actually used
>> (and maybe other tools would need
>> that as well).
>
> Did I get it right that the problem with using SAF in this case is that
> it wouldn't be sufficient to add a SAF comment on top of the MACRO
> definition, but we would need a SAF comment on top of every MACRO
> invocation?
>
> If so, then not just for this MACRO but in general basically we have to
> use deviations.rst.
>
> Luca, do you know what would be the behavior for cppcheck and/or
> Coverity? I imagine it will be the same and they would also need a
> deviation at every MACRO invocation, not just the definition?
Seems that cppcheck reports at the macro definition, instead Coverity reports
at the macro invocation.
|
