On 20.11.2023 14:13, Federico Serafini wrote:
> On 20/11/23 10:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.11.2023 09:40, Federico Serafini wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/sort.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/sort.h
>>> @@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
>>> extern gnu_inline
>>> #endif
>>> void sort(void *base, size_t num, size_t size,
>>> - int (*cmp)(const void *, const void *),
>>> - void (*swap)(void *, void *, size_t))
>>> + int (*cmp)(const void *key, const void *elem),
>>
>> Why "key" and "elem" here, but ...
>>
>>> + void (*swap)(void *a, void *b, size_t size))
>>
>> ... "a" and "b" here? The first example of users of sort() that I'm
>> looking at right now (x86/extable.c) is consistent in its naming.
>>
>
> On the Arm side there are {cmp,swap}_memory_node() and
> {cmp,swap}_mmio_handler(): "key"/"elem" are used for the comparison
> and "_a"/"_b" for the swap.
So - re-raising a question Stefano did raise - is Misra concerned about
such discrepancies? If yes, _all_ instances need harmonizing. If not, I
see no reason to go with misleading names here.
Jan
