Re: [RFC 1/4] x86/ioemul: address MISRA C:2012 Rule 9.3

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 25/10/2023 09:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.10.2023 22:27, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > On 24.10.2023 16:31, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> > > > Partially explicitly initalized .matches arrays result in violations
> > > > of Rule 9.3; this is resolved by using designated initializers,
> > > > which is permitted by the Rule.
> > > >
> > > > Mechanical changes.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > While not overly bad, I'm still not really seeing the improvement.
> > > Yet aiui changes induced by Misra are supposed to improve things in
> > > some direction?
> > I think the improvement is clarity, in the sense that the designated
> > initializers make it clearer that the array may be sparsely 
> > initialized
> > and that the remaining elements should be initialized to zero
> > automatically.
> That's as clear from the original code, imo.
>
> Jan
There's also this functionally equivalent alternative, with or without 
the zeros, which
doesn't incur in the risk of mistakenly attempting to initialize the 
same element twice,
while also giving an explicit cue to the reader that all elements are 
truly zero-initialized.
         .matches = {
             DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIOS_VENDOR, "HP"),
             DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "ProLiant DL5"),
+            {0}, {0}
         },

--
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)