[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN PATCH 1/5] xen/common: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.2
On 18/11/23 03:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Fri, 17 Nov 2023, Federico Serafini wrote:diff --git a/xen/common/stop_machine.c b/xen/common/stop_machine.c index 3adbe380de..398cfd507c 100644 --- a/xen/common/stop_machine.c +++ b/xen/common/stop_machine.c @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ struct stopmachine_data {unsigned int fn_cpu;int fn_result; - int (*fn)(void *); + int (*fn)(void *data); void *fn_data; };At least one of the possible function used here calls the parameter "arg", see take_cpu_down. But I don't think it is a MISRA requirement to also harmonize those?@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ static void stopmachine_wait_state(void) * mandatory to be called only on an idle vcpu, as otherwise active core * scheduling might hang. */ -int stop_machine_run(int (*fn)(void *), void *data, unsigned int cpu) +int stop_machine_run(int (*fn)(void *data), void *data, unsigned int cpu) { unsigned int i, nr_cpus; unsigned int this = smp_processor_id(); diff --git a/xen/common/tasklet.c b/xen/common/tasklet.c index 3ad67b5c24..3649798e6b 100644 --- a/xen/common/tasklet.c +++ b/xen/common/tasklet.c @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ static void migrate_tasklets_from_cpu(unsigned int cpu, struct list_head *list) spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tasklet_lock, flags); }-void tasklet_init(struct tasklet *t, void (*func)(void *), void *data)+void tasklet_init(struct tasklet *t, void (*func)(void *data), void *data) { memset(t, 0, sizeof(*t)); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&t->list); @@ -208,7 +208,8 @@ void tasklet_init(struct tasklet *t, void (*func)(void *), void *data) t->data = data; }-void softirq_tasklet_init(struct tasklet *t, void (*func)(void *), void *data)+void softirq_tasklet_init(struct tasklet *t, + void (*func)(void *data), void *data) { tasklet_init(t, func, data); t->is_softirq = 1; diff --git a/xen/common/timer.c b/xen/common/timer.c index 0fddfa7487..bf7792dcb3 100644 --- a/xen/common/timer.c +++ b/xen/common/timer.c @@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ static bool active_timer(const struct timer *timer)void init_timer(struct timer *timer, - void (*function)(void *), + void (*function)(void *data), void *data, unsigned int cpu) { @@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ void kill_timer(struct timer *timer)static void execute_timer(struct timers *ts, struct timer *t){ - void (*fn)(void *) = t->function; + void (*fn)(void *data) = t->function; void *data = t->data;t->status = TIMER_STATUS_inactive;diff --git a/xen/include/xen/rangeset.h b/xen/include/xen/rangeset.h index 135f33f606..390f7b6082 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/rangeset.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/rangeset.h @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ bool_t __must_check rangeset_overlaps_range( struct rangeset *r, unsigned long s, unsigned long e); int rangeset_report_ranges( struct rangeset *r, unsigned long s, unsigned long e, - int (*cb)(unsigned long s, unsigned long e, void *), void *ctxt); + int (*cb)(unsigned long s, unsigned long e, void *data), void *ctxt);Also here some of the functions use "arg" instead of ctxt/* * Note that the consume function can return an error value apart from @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ int rangeset_report_ranges( */ int rangeset_consume_ranges(struct rangeset *r, int (*cb)(unsigned long s, unsigned long e, - void *, unsigned long *c), + void *ctxt, unsigned long *c), void *ctxt);Also here some of the functions use "dom" like irq_remove_cb. But I actually like the patch as is, so if that's OK from a MISRA point of view then I would give my reviewed-by. Yes, this is OK for MISRA. -- Federico Serafini, M.Sc. Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |