On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 23.02.2024 10:35, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > > Refactor cpu_notifier_call_chain into two functions: > > - the variant that is allowed to fail loses the nofail flag > > - the variant that shouldn't fail is encapsulated in a call > > to the failing variant, with an additional check. > > > > This prevents uses of the function that are not supposed to > > fail from ignoring the return value, thus violating Rule 17.7: > > "The value returned by a function having non-void return type shall > > be used". > > > > No functional change. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <[email protected]> > > I'm afraid I disagree with this kind of bifurcation. No matter what > Misra thinks or says, it is normal for return values of functions to > not always be relevant to check.
Hi Jan, I disagree. Regardless of MISRA, I really think return values need to be checked. Moreover, we decided as a group to honor MISRA Rule 17.7, which requires return values to be checked. This patch is a good step forward. > To deal with the Misra rule imo requires to first have an abstract > plan of how to handle such globally in the code base. Imo such a plan > can't be to introduce perhaps dozens of new wrapper functions like is > done here. This patch is following the right pattern, one we already follow with the _locked suffix.
