xen/cpu: fix MISRA C 2012 Rule 20.7 violation

In MASK_DECLARE_ macros, the macro parameter 'x' is used as expression and
therefore it is good to be enclosed in parentheses to prevent against
unintended expansions.

Signed-off-by: Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@gmail.com>
While there add the blanks missing around the + operators involved.

Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@arm.com>

diff --git a/xen/common/cpu.c b/xen/common/cpu.c
index b0b63cdb3638aa0299dd63edef6a8a68b6c6d2a0..4bdb017b0ea4b84268732af728e0cd00d5f5051f 100644 (file)
--- a/xen/common/cpu.c
+++ b/xen/common/cpu.c
@@ -25,10 +25,10 @@ const cpumask_t cpumask_all = {
  */
 
 /* cpu_bit_bitmap[0] is empty - so we can back into it */
-#define MASK_DECLARE_1(x) [x+1][0] = 1UL << (x)
-#define MASK_DECLARE_2(x) MASK_DECLARE_1(x), MASK_DECLARE_1(x+1)
-#define MASK_DECLARE_4(x) MASK_DECLARE_2(x), MASK_DECLARE_2(x+2)
-#define MASK_DECLARE_8(x) MASK_DECLARE_4(x), MASK_DECLARE_4(x+4)
+#define MASK_DECLARE_1(x) [(x) + 1][0] = 1UL << (x)
+#define MASK_DECLARE_2(x) MASK_DECLARE_1(x), MASK_DECLARE_1((x) + 1)
+#define MASK_DECLARE_4(x) MASK_DECLARE_2(x), MASK_DECLARE_2((x) + 2)
+#define MASK_DECLARE_8(x) MASK_DECLARE_4(x), MASK_DECLARE_4((x) + 4)
 
 const unsigned long cpu_bit_bitmap[BITS_PER_LONG+1][BITS_TO_LONGS(NR_CPUS)] = {