From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suravee Suthikulpanit Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] passthrough/amd: Shuffle declaration. Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:19:46 -0500 Message-ID: <52387312.4000504@amd.com> References: <1378988130-24172-1-git-send-email-tim@xen.org> <1378988130-24172-5-git-send-email-tim@xen.org> <5231DFFB02000078000F2C04@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20130912134455.GG56703@ocelot.phlegethon.org> <5231E5D002000078000F2C6F@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VLx4G-00055v-V2 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:19:57 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5231E5D002000078000F2C6F@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: Jacob Shin , Tim Deegan , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/12/2013 09:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 12.09.13 at 15:44, Tim Deegan wrote: >> At 14:38 +0100 on 12 Sep (1378996715), Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 12.09.13 at 14:15, Tim Deegan wrote: >>>> Coverity's parser chokes on seeing __section() before the type. >>>> >>>> Coverity CID 1087190 >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan >>>> Cc: Suravee Suthikulpanit >>>> Cc: Jacob Shin >>>> --- >>>> xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >>>> b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >>>> index 89b359c..2bfe61e 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >>>> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >>>> @@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ static u16 __init parse_ivhd_device_extended_range( >>>> return dev_length; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(ioapic_cmdline, ARRAY_SIZE(ioapic_sbdf)); >>>> +static DECLARE_BITMAP(__initdata ioapic_cmdline, ARRAY_SIZE(ioapic_sbdf)); >>> But putting it inside the DECLARE_BITMAP() doesn't seem that nice >>> either. I think the second best option - if we need to play such >>> games for Coverity in the first place - >> Yes, I think the question of how much we're willing to accommodate >> Coverity in our source code needs to be discussed. On that subject I >> have an RFC patch that introduces some annotation... >> >>> would be to put this at the end. >> Yes, that sounds better. Thus? > Ack. > >> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c >> @@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ static u16 __init parse_ivhd_device_extended_range( >> return dev_length; >> } >> >> -static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(ioapic_cmdline, ARRAY_SIZE(ioapic_sbdf)); >> +static DECLARE_BITMAP(ioapic_cmdline, ARRAY_SIZE(ioapic_sbdf)) __initdata; >> >> static void __init parse_ivrs_ioapic(char *str) >> { >> >> Tim. Acked-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit