Re: [XEN PATCH 2/3] xen/sched: address violation of MISRA C Rule 8.2

["Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2001 bytes --]

On 17.02.25 09:31, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2025-02-17 08:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 15.02.2025 00:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Feb 2025, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>>> Rule 8.2 states: "Function types shall be in prototype form with
>>>> named parameters".
>>>>
>>>> The parameter name is missing from the function pointer type
>>>> that constitutes the first parameter.
>>>>
>>>> No functional change.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> This small fix is needed in order to keep the rule clean in the
>>>> follow-up patch that changes the Xen configuration under static
>>>> analysis.
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't really certain about the right name to give to the parameter,
>>>> so if there are better options I'd be happy to accept them.
>>>> ---
>>>>  xen/common/sched/rt.c | 2 +-
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> This is a specific scheduler you touch, which I think wants expressing
>> somehow (e.g. via an adjusted prefix) in the patch subject.
>>
> 
> Ok. I think it should be "xen/rt" then.
> 
>>>> --- a/xen/common/sched/rt.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/common/sched/rt.c
>>>> @@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ deadline_queue_remove(struct list_head *queue, struct 
>>>> list_head *elem)
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>  static inline bool
>>>> -deadline_queue_insert(struct rt_unit * (*qelem)(struct list_head *),
>>>> +deadline_queue_insert(struct rt_unit * (*qelem)(struct list_head *q_iter),
>>>
>>> I think it should be "elem" instead of "q_iter"
>>
>> Why would it matter what the name is? There's no separate decl to stay in
>> sync with. (That said, I'd be happy with "elem"; it'll be a matter of the
>> maintainers to judge.)
>>
>> Jan
> 
> I'd be ok with that too.
> 

I think naming it "elem" is the better choice, as both functions used for
the qelem() parameter name their parameter "elem" already.

With that change:

Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>


Juergen

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3743 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]