Re: [XEN PATCH] docs/misra: mark the gzip folder as adopted code

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 18.04.2024 20:33, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 18/04/2024 8:39 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 15.04.2024 17:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2024 10:56 am, Federico Serafini wrote:
>>>> Mark the whole gzip folder as adopted code and remove the redundant
>>>> deviation of file inflate.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Federico Serafini <federico.serafini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> I hadn't realised that we had a special case like this.  Definitely
>>> better to get rid of it.
>>>
>>> I've pulled this into my `for-next` branch, and will get it committed
>>> properly when OSSTest (our non-gitlab CI) is in a happier state.
>> Hmm. Considering Daniel's work (which I'll comment on separately), is this
>> really going to remain "adopted"? We're about to diverge to a degree where
>> simply taking patches from the original source isn't going to work anymore.
>> IOW I think we want either Daniel's work (and perhaps follow-on adjustments)
>> or marking of that code as adopted.
> 
> inflate.c is was from Linux in 2010.  There's only one build fix and one
> comment change in Linux since 2010, whereas Xen's copy has seen several
> bugfixes and cleanups.
> 
> gunzip.c has floated around rather more (it was originally some glue
> code in bZImage.c) but it was entirely rewritten first, to support other
> types of decompression (we did this differently in Xen), and second to
> support KASLR.
> 
> In both cases, there's not an upstream to usefully track, and we
> probably take ownership.

I'm confused by the combination of your reply (seemingly agreeing with my
perspective) vs you having committed the patch. Can you clarify whether I
misunderstood your reply? Imo gzip code should no longer be excluded from
any scans when we take ownership. Hence why I would have expected a v2 of
the patch also dropping (rather than adjusting) the exclude-list.json
entry.

Jan