Hi Michal,
>>
>>> + if ( shm_id_match )
>>> {
>>> - if ( strncmp(shm_id, shmem_extra[i].shm_id,
>>> - MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH) == 0 )
>>> + /*
>>> + * Regions have same shm_id (cases):
>>> + * 1) physical host address is supplied:
>>> + * - OK: paddr is equal and size is equal (same region)
>>> + * - Fail: paddr doesn't match or size doesn't match (there
>>> + * cannot exists two shmem regions with same shm_id)
>>> + * 2) physical host address is NOT supplied:
>>> + * - OK: size is equal (same region)
>>> + * - Fail: size is not equal (same shm_id must identify
>>> only one
>>> + * region, there can't be two different regions
>>> with same
>>> + * shm_id)
>>> + */
>>> + bool start_match = paddr_assigned ? (paddr ==
>>> mem->bank[i].start) :
>>> + true;
>>> +
>>> + if ( start_match && size == mem->bank[i].size )
>>> break;
>>> else
>>> {
>>> - printk("fdt: xen,shm-id %s does not match for all the
>>> nodes using the same region.\n",
>>> + printk("fdt: different shared memory region could not
>>> share the same shm ID %s\n",
>>> shm_id);
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>> }
>>> - else if ( strncmp(shm_id, shmem_extra[i].shm_id,
>>> - MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH) != 0 )
>>> - continue;
>>> else
>>> {
>> There is no need for this else and entire block given that the block within
>> if either calls break or return
>
> There was a MISRA discussion about else at the end of if ... else if ...
> (R15.7) and I don’t remember
> the outcome
Sorry I was misreading the code here, sure I’ll remove the else.
Cheers,
Luca
