Re: [RFC 2/4] x86/shutdown: address MISRA C:2012 Rule 9.3

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 24.10.2023 16:31, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id __initconstrel 
> reboot_dmi_table[] = {
>          .ident = "Dell OptiPlex 745",
>          .matches = {
>              DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 745"),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0MM599"),
> +            [0] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 745"),
> +            [1] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0MM599")
>          },
>      },
>      {    /* Handle problems with rebooting on Dell Optiplex 745 with 0KW626 
> */
> @@ -235,8 +235,8 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id __initconstrel 
> reboot_dmi_table[] = {
>          .ident = "Dell OptiPlex 745",
>          .matches = {
>              DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 745"),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0KW626"),
> +            [0] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 745"),
> +            [1] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0KW626")
>          },
>      },
>      {    /* Handle problems with rebooting on Dell Optiplex 330 with 0KP561 
> */
> @@ -245,8 +245,8 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id __initconstrel 
> reboot_dmi_table[] = {
>          .ident = "Dell OptiPlex 330",
>          .matches = {
>              DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 330"),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0KP561"),
> +            [0] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 330"),
> +            [1] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0KP561")
>          },
>      },
>      {    /* Handle problems with rebooting on Dell Optiplex 360 with 0T656F 
> */
> @@ -255,8 +255,8 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id __initconstrel 
> reboot_dmi_table[] = {
>          .ident = "Dell OptiPlex 360",
>          .matches = {
>              DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 360"),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0T656F"),
> +            [0] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 360"),
> +            [1] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0T656F")
>          },
>      },
>      {    /* Handle problems with rebooting on Dell OptiPlex 760 with 0G919G 
> */
> @@ -265,8 +265,8 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id __initconstrel 
> reboot_dmi_table[] = {
>          .ident = "Dell OptiPlex 760",
>          .matches = {
>              DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 760"),
> -            DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0G919G"),
> +            [0] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "OptiPlex 760"),
> +            [1] = DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "0G919G")
>          },
>      },
>      {    /* Handle problems with rebooting on Dell 2400's */

Well, no, this is what absolutely should not happen: You're breaking
the code here, but initializing slot 0 twice in multiple instances.
>From looking just at the patch I probably wouldn't have noticed, but
the "always elements 0 and 1 only" pattern made me "grep -lr", where
the issue became apparent. Otherwise I was about to suggest we shrink
array size to just 2 elements.

Jan