| Message ID | ab8b527c775fbb7681a4658828d53e7e3419be10.1719308599.git.alessandro.zucchelli@bugseng.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | address violation of MISRA C Rule 13.6 | expand |
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024, Alessandro Zucchelli wrote: > In the file common/softirq macro set_bit is called with argument > smp_processor_id. > Once expanded this set_bit's argument is used in sizeof operations > and thus 'smp_processor_id', being a macro that expands to a > function call with potential side effects, generates a violation. > > To address this violation the value of smp_processor_id is therefore > stored in a variable called 'cpu' before passing it to macro set_bit. > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Alessandro Zucchelli <alessandro.zucchelli@bugseng.com> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
On 25.06.2024 12:14, Alessandro Zucchelli wrote: > In the file common/softirq macro set_bit is called with argument > smp_processor_id. > Once expanded this set_bit's argument is used in sizeof operations > and thus 'smp_processor_id', being a macro that expands to a > function call with potential side effects, generates a violation. Noticing only now, but applicable also to patch 2: "expands" isn't quite right, is it? That's true for x86, but apparently not for Arm. Unless I managed to overlook something there. So perhaps "may expand" instead? > --- a/xen/common/softirq.c > +++ b/xen/common/softirq.c > @@ -139,7 +139,8 @@ void cpu_raise_softirq_batch_finish(void) > > void raise_softirq(unsigned int nr) > { > - set_bit(nr, &softirq_pending(smp_processor_id())); > + unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > + set_bit(nr, &softirq_pending(cpu)); > } Nit (style): Blank line between declaration(s) and statement(s) please. I guess both aspects could be taken care of while committing. Jan
diff --git a/xen/common/softirq.c b/xen/common/softirq.c index bee4a82009..c5f3870534 100644 --- a/xen/common/softirq.c +++ b/xen/common/softirq.c @@ -139,7 +139,8 @@ void cpu_raise_softirq_batch_finish(void) void raise_softirq(unsigned int nr) { - set_bit(nr, &softirq_pending(smp_processor_id())); + unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); + set_bit(nr, &softirq_pending(cpu)); } /*
In the file common/softirq macro set_bit is called with argument smp_processor_id. Once expanded this set_bit's argument is used in sizeof operations and thus 'smp_processor_id', being a macro that expands to a function call with potential side effects, generates a violation. To address this violation the value of smp_processor_id is therefore stored in a variable called 'cpu' before passing it to macro set_bit. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Alessandro Zucchelli <alessandro.zucchelli@bugseng.com> --- xen/common/softirq.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)