From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] xen: Identify panic and reboot/halt functions as noreturn Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:19:41 +0000 Message-ID: <530B711D.2080408@citrix.com> References: <1393254090-5081-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1393254090-5081-3-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <530B7B42020000780011EE5E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <530B7B42020000780011EE5E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Keir Fraser , Stefano Stabellini , Ian Campbell , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 24/02/14 16:02, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 24.02.14 at 16:01, Andrew Cooper wrote: > This patch shows a somewhat undesirable inconsistency (having been > present in I think les obvious ways in earlier patches too): > >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/shutdown.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/shutdown.c >> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ static void raw_machine_reset(void) >> platform_reset(); >> } >> >> -static void halt_this_cpu(void *arg) >> +static void noreturn halt_this_cpu(void *arg) > For function definitions you place the attribute where I personally > would expect it to be (iirc it can't go between the closing paren > after the parameter declarations and the opening brace of the > function body), yet ... Hmm - I thought I had fixed all of these - I shall audit and respin. I certainly did intend to be consistent. ~Andrew