Re: [XEN PATCH 11/11] x86/mm: Add assertion to address MISRA C:2012 Rule 2.1

[Jan Beulich]

On 02.08.2023 16:38, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm.c
> @@ -4879,6 +4879,7 @@ long arch_memory_op(unsigned long cmd, 
> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
>          return subarch_memory_op(cmd, arg);
>      }
>  
> +    ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();
>      return 0;
>  }

I'd prefer to instead switch earlier "return 0" to "break".

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c
> @@ -1045,6 +1045,7 @@ p2m_pod_zero_check(struct p2m_domain *p2m, const gfn_t 
> *gfns, unsigned int count
>      }
>  
>      return;
> +    ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();
>  
>  out_unmap:
>      /*

In the description you say "before", but here you add something _after_
"return". What's the deal?

Jan