Re: [XEN PATCH 1/2] xen: apply deviation for Rule 8.4 (asm-only definitions)

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>]

On 01.09.2023 18:34, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> As stated in 'docs/misra/rules.rst' the functions that are used only by
> asm modules do not need to conform to MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.4.
> The deviations are carried out with a SAF comment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>
> ---
> Where the identifier for a function definition is on the next line w.r.t. the
> return type, they have been put on the same line (e.g. efi_start) to avoid
> stylistically questionable constructs, such as
> 
> int
> /* SAF-1-safe */
> func(void) {
> 	...
> }

And

/* SAF-1-safe */
int
func(void) {

is not an option?

Further in the cover letter you say "Deviating variables needs more care, and
is therefore postponed to another patch", yet then here you annotate a couple
of variables as well. Could you clarify what the criteria are for "needs more
care"?

Jan