[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/misra: introduce rules.rst


  • To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • From: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 10:21:47 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=A5mV+7evD0CmbiOs8GugWlozumwiUqkJm56WZD5Qv4s=; b=DHPum1UdeSRef4NJtfrxITNzjqTnz9VKKw0q5rKrfMGNTxL8JDUw0Y3wT+ol+jXTqBNJR+2HLppHddzNpz7ImN6Rgn1c2p2eawEz8Wgjae8Bmyb36b4LkIMYeL1xaUjgima5+lIx86d999scPEqlNhKdS/w/aE+iaTcbQvgy0zmyUFO98KPBWk/eIhTBZYX2A8NoxsFC+d6pIVzo3bUr75LxWjRIb/LWMI9iW326QW1m364Hj5vBzOS5Yr18FOCTbxkVEYHPZ9X8b7iqE59AtmhJcs5lxTSZS03DLIUloFC9pxNavehtJGv7it7i8t2nrMw1nzUvvJ1TimSu6PNi3A==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=eIpzxkJ326gm0MeMRiFSrYDlphLpgYJQ1dX7iN2xpi4w/hWjvkHvIxRpGFI2xuI2f/GJr3lqnS8NyyP9EuDe9CHsN4LrxDJIWt2ws+OVPb9dC6ODnP3VoPKo4FGPFtetRtrTQXeYI1ZpS1f32hnqsgAod2CM63lXpI0XUxFqwmgM5W5jgd7c64vJ4UqsJHsQL19++uehdVEElbyUCs+7uMEUH6+YDMBV7CcsrNZAAG6W6l071Jp05mHehi4pDU8mvJfNmu+/nw0btLIq+CW1QxAmlY25fDefTppi9NEntqRM55qCgvFPHFfBoFLufITMFNb34nAGuNKbqp3zg/rk1Q==
  • Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=citrix.com;
  • Cc: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 30 May 2022 10:22:02 +0000
  • Ironport-data: A9a23:Z9fVlqN6cImmnOTvrR0alsFynXyQoLVcMsEvi/8bNLWB5Y4Qp3Zem TxOHSzEb+HbITHFz+oGOoXi/EkAsZeHm4NlTABqqX09RSJGpMSYWIvJdh7+NnnNf8PPEhNut 51FYYWfcJA+RCeC+hrxOba49XMhj/jZTdIQZAK81gVZHGeIHw992UILd5cFv7NVbfiF7yKl6 N2i88bWYgao1jB9b2lEu/yO8EIx4K/5tWIW4wdia6ga4FOGm3crV59OfqvZw1kU42V38kxWY 86ZkdlVK0uAp09F5uuNy+q9KgtQKlLrFVDmZkB+AsBOuTAf4H1rukoHHKBEMx0P1m7Rx4kZJ Ohl7vRcdy94ZsUgp8xFO/VoO3kW0XpuoeKvzdCX6KR//mWeG5fe66wG4HIeZOX0zt1fE2BWn cH0HRhWBvy1a0Ba95rgIgVkrpxLwMAGp+rzsFk4pd3SJa5OrZwu38wmTDKXtds9rpkmIBrQW yYWQT5hSRDLZUFwBnwwB5AVrOS6mXTtcRQN/Tp5pYJvi4TS5CpY9eG1dfbwJJmNT8gTmVuEr GXb+Wi/GgsdKNGU1TuC9DSrm/PLmiT4HokVEdVU9NYz2AHVmjNVVU1QDAPmyRW6ohfWt9Z3B EET4CUj64Qv8kiiVvH2XgGioW7CtRkZMzZVO7JgslDRkfuPi+qfLk1UcGFEdvM4jcYJdC0D1 3qNjdjgFwU65dV5TlrYrN94twiaOyIYMGsDbi8sVhYe7p/op4RbphDSStduFoalg9uzHiv/q xigoTIinbwVgYgu3r+i4FHcqzu2o97CSQtdzhXaWCep4x10YKahZpe08h7L4PBYNoGbQ1Kd+ n8elKC29/wDA5iLk2qWXOwHEbWt5vCEGC3dhV9pD98q8DHF02W4YYla7TV6JUFoGsUJYznkZ AnUoww52XNIFH6jbKsyb4fvDc0vlPDkDY68Dq2SacdSaJ9scgPB5DtpeUObw2Hqlg4rjL07P pCYN82rCB72FJha8dZ/fM9FuZdD+8z07Tq7qUzTp/h/7YejWQ==
  • Ironport-hdrordr: A9a23:MelBEaE1CrxveYEWpLqEEseALOsnbusQ8zAXPiBKJCC9vPb5qy nOpoV+6faQslwssR4b9uxoVJPvfZq+z+8R3WByB8bAYOCOggLBQL2KhbGI/9SKIVydygcy78 Zdm6gVMqyMMbB55/yKnDVRxbwbsaa6GKPDv5ah8590JzsaDJ2Jd21Ce32m+ksdfnghObMJUK Cyy+BgvDSadXEefq2AdwM4t7iqnayzqHr+CyR2fyIa1A==
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
  • Thread-index: AQHYb89PX1LGuEcm0kCKHXEgaA2yKq0vNXYAgAEjhQCAAJGbAIAAAxGAgAAFpgCAAC97AIAAc0MAgAC4OQCAARHVgIADyvaAgAABVgCAAALZAIAAAdqAgAACLACAAAPcAIAAB2IA
  • Thread-topic: [PATCH 1/2] docs/misra: introduce rules.rst



On 30 May 2022, at 10:55, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 30.05.2022 11:41, Julien Grall wrote:


On 30/05/2022 10:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.05.2022 11:27, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,

On 30/05/2022 10:16, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.05.2022 11:12, Julien Grall wrote:
On 28/05/2022 00:16, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
"""
It is possible that in specific circumstances it is best not to follow a
rule because it is not possible or because the alternative leads to
better code quality. Those cases are called "deviations". They are
permissible as long as they are documented, either as an in-code comment
or as part of the commit message. Other documentation mechanisms are

I would drop the "as part of the commit message" because it is a lot
more difficult to associate the deviation with a rationale (the code may
have been moved and you would need to go through the history).

But this was added in response to me pointing out that code comments
aren't standardized yet as to their format. The alternative, as said
before, would be to come up with a scheme first, before starting to
mandate playing by certain of the rules (and hence requiring deviations
to be documented).

I don't think this is necessary short term. It is easy to rework a
comment after the fact. It is a lot more difficult to go through the
history and find the rationale.

We all know what "short term" may mean - we may remain in this mode of
operation for an extended period of time. It'll potentially be quite a
bit of churn to subsequently adjust all such comments which would
have accumulated, and - for not being standardized - can't easily be
grep-ed for.

Well... Scanner will likely point out the issues we deviate from. So you 
we have an easy way to know where the comments need to be adjusted.

By documenting things in the commit message the state of
the code base doesn't change, and we'll continue to rely on scanners
to locate sets of candidates for adjustment or deviation commentary.

The part I am missing how documenting the deviations in the commit 
message help... Can you clarify it?

I understood Stefano for this to merely be for the purpose of justifying
the deviation (preempting review comments).

Right, so at a very minimum, if we say “This is a rule now”, and a submitter wants a deviation from that rule, then the reviewer needs to know the justification for the deviation.  The commit message is the obvious place for that.

Obviously something *else* we might want is a more convenient way to keep that rationale for the future, when we start to officially document deviations.  Given that the scanner will point out all the places where deviations happen, I don’t think an unstructured comment with an informal summary of the justification would be a problem — it seems like it would be a lot easier, when we start to officially document deviations, to transform comments in the existing codebase, than to search through the mailing lists and/or git commit history to find the rationale (or try to work out unaided what the intent was).  But I don’t have strong opinions on the matter.

 -George

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.