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

Re: [PATCH v2] misra: consider conversion from UL or (void*) to function pointer as safe


  • To: Dmytro Prokopchuk1 <dmytro_prokopchuk1@xxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 15:25:57 +0200
  • Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
  • Cc: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 13:26:01 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 25.09.2025 10:04, Dmytro Prokopchuk1 wrote:
> --- a/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> +++ b/docs/misra/deviations.rst
> @@ -366,11 +366,22 @@ Deviations related to MISRA C:2012 Rules:
>       - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
>  
>     * - R11.1
> -     - The conversion from a function pointer to unsigned long or (void \*) 
> does
> +     - The conversion from a function pointer to unsigned long or '(void *)' 
> does
>         not lose any information, provided that the target type has enough 
> bits
>         to store it.
>       - Tagged as `safe` for ECLAIR.
>  
> +   * - R11.1
> +     - The conversion from unsigned long or '(void *)' to a function pointer 
> is
> +       safe because it relies on both ABI definitions and compiler 
> implementations
> +       supported by Xen which define consistent and compatible 
> representations
> +       (i.e., having the same size and memory layout) for '(void *)', 
> unsigned
> +       long, and function pointers, enabling safe conversions between these 
> types
> +       without data loss or corruption. The compile-time assertions 
> (BUILD_BUG_ON
> +       macro) is integrated into 'xen/common/version.c' to confirm 
> conversions
> +       compatibility across all target platforms.

As you use (and mean) plural, s/is/are/ ? I also think the "The" at the start
of the sentence wants dropping.

Further, why this very dissimilar wording compared to what's said about
conversions _from_ function pointer types?

And then ...

> --- a/xen/common/version.c
> +++ b/xen/common/version.c
> @@ -217,6 +217,17 @@ void __init xen_build_init(void)
>  #endif /* CONFIG_X86 */
>  }
>  #endif /* BUILD_ID */
> +
> +static void __init __maybe_unused build_assertions(void)
> +{
> +    /*
> +     * To confirm conversion compatibility between unsigned long, (void *)
> +     * and function pointers for all supported architectures.
> +     */
> +    BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(unsigned long) != sizeof(void (*)(void)));
> +    BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(void *) != sizeof(void (*)(void)));
> +}

... I'm unconvinced checking merely the sizes is sufficient. On architectures
involving function descriptors (e.g. ia64) converting in this direction is
safe only if earlier on the value was obtained as the result of a conversion
in the opposite direction (and all of this within a single component, which
of course is guaranteed for Xen).

Jan



 


Rackspace

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