Routines that were annotated with __drv_dispatchType(DRIVER_DISPATCH) are not seen as WdmCallbackRoutine or WdmDispatchRoutines

[finchnest]

__drv_dispatchType(DRIVER_DISPATCH)
__drv_dispatchType(IRP_MJ_CREATE)
__drv_dispatchType(IRP_MJ_SHUTDOWN)
NTSTATUS
CdFsdDispatch (
In PDEVICE_OBJECT DeviceObject,
Inout PIRP Irp
);

CdFsdDispatch, for example will not be caught by queries that look for WdmDispatchRoutines or WdmCallbackRoutines

[NateD-MSFT]

I've been taking a look at this and it seems to me we need clarification on what a valid dispatch routine is w/r/t annotations and typedefs. Today our library only looks for the function to use the DRIVER_DISPATCH typedef, but it's unclear to me if PAfD would consider the above case to be a dispatch routine in analysis (and even if it does, if we should maintain that behavior.)