Re: [RFC 0/5] Introduce dynamic tracer using Livepatch

[Ryo Takakura <takakura@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 28 Oct 2026 18:22:21 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>On 28/10/2026 8:08 am, Ryo Takakura wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2026 10:18:44 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Separately, you have a number of MISRA violations which you're
>>>>> introducing in your series.  I see you've got cf_check, which suggests
>>>>> you have built in GitlabCI.  Have you also run Eclair?
>>>> Thank you for pointing this out.
>>>> My apologies for the violations. I wasn't aware of the tests
>>>> and haven't run either of them. I added the cf_check following
>>>> the existing code that I referred to when preparing this series.
>>>> I'll make sure to run those tests before sending next version.
>>> Do you have an account on Gitlab to run the CI testing?  If not, reach
>>> out on Matrix.
>> I don't have an account yet.
>> Ok, I'll ask on Matrix.
>
>To get you started, I put this series through:
>
>  https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/pipelines/3000384733
>
>There's one Eclair failure on ARM.

Thank you for running the test.
I see the report saying its violating MC3A2.R1.1.
I'll fix the issue and make sure it passes the test.

>Interestingly, it's not the failure I was expecting to see.  I was
>expecting it to complain about
>
>+    uint32_t insns[2] = {
>+        aarch64_insn_gen_nop(),
>+        aarch64_insn_gen_nop(),
>+    };
>
>because of the order those function calls being undefined.
>
>I was also expecting to see some failures due to arithmetic on pointers
>of different types, but maybe we've not made those rules enforcing yet.

I see.
I'll make sure to address them as well in the next version.

Sincerely,
Ryo Takakura