Re: [XEN PATCH v2] xen/compiler: deviate the inline macro for MISRA C Rule 20.4

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2024-03-12 12:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.03.2024 12:13, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> > Rule 20.4 states: "A macro shall not be defined with the same name
> > as a keyword".
> >
> > Defining this macro with the same name as the inline keyword
> > allows for additionally checking that out-of-lined static inline
> > functions end up in the correct section while minimizing churn and
> > has a positive impact on the overall safety. See [1] for additional
> > context on the motivation of this deviation.
> >
> > No functional change.
> >
> > [1] 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/adaa6d55-266d-4df8-8967-9340080d17e4@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> with ...
>
> > --- a/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> > +++ b/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> > @@ -322,6 +322,12 @@ Deviations related to MISRA C:2012 Rules:
> >           - /\* Fallthrough \*/
> >           - /\* Fallthrough. \*/
> >
> > +   * - R20.4
> > +     -  The override of the keyword \"inline\" in xen/compiler.h is 
> > present so
> > +        that section contents checks pass when the compiler chooses 
> > not to
> > +        inline a particular function.
> ... padding (1st line of this bullet point) and indentation (2nd and 
> 3rd
> lines) adjusted to what's used elsewhere, including e.g ...
Yeah, sorry.

> > +     - Comment-based deviation.
> > +
> >     * - R20.7
> >       - Code violating Rule 20.7 is safe when macro parameters are 
> > used:
> >         (1) as function arguments;
> ... here. Happy to do so while committing.
Thanks,

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