Re: [XEN PATCH 05/10] xen/perfc: address violations of MISRA C Rule 20.7

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>]

On 2024-02-29 17:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 29.02.2024 16:27, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/perfc.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/perfc.c
>> @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@
>>  #include <public/sysctl.h>
>>  #include <asm/perfc.h>
>> 
>> -#define PERFCOUNTER( var, name )              { name, TYPE_SINGLE, 0 
>> },
>> -#define PERFCOUNTER_ARRAY( var, name, size )  { name, TYPE_ARRAY,  
>> size },
>> -#define PERFSTATUS( var, name )               { name, TYPE_S_SINGLE, 
>> 0 },
>> -#define PERFSTATUS_ARRAY( var, name, size )   { name, TYPE_S_ARRAY,  
>> size },
>> +#define PERFCOUNTER( var, name )              { (name), TYPE_SINGLE, 
>> 0 },
>> +#define PERFCOUNTER_ARRAY( var, name, size )  { (name), TYPE_ARRAY,  
>> (size) },
>> +#define PERFSTATUS( var, name )               { (name), 
>> TYPE_S_SINGLE, 0 },
>> +#define PERFSTATUS_ARRAY( var, name, size )   { (name), TYPE_S_ARRAY, 
>>  (size) },
> 
> Same question as for patch 4. Plus if this needed touching, then the 
> stray
> blanks immediately inside the parentheses would please be dropped as 
> well.
> 

Noted

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