From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists1p.gnu.org (lists1p.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 208F1C79FB6 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:32:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1x4JLF-0006S1-1E; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:32:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1x4JLD-0006Ro-JX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:31:59 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1x4JLB-0002Or-7c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:31:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1788964315; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hiLPn9EDrtYnFla3CWK7UcwTJYql5esYjVWUeZOZpb4=; b=ZSBo/E2LtpytjOgv12woEk1gKNpEjlut637CCiSGuU/AYA7JPWoskBuTDDrsaBzRCfewBe R5Osb5DqH67sI7zW6roTJ+1quudTwCA6nadDPZMHOfU5tjD5opeE3BI8Q/1mThXjEoUYj9 dacI7kNvJjSrrhqJANnDArwmIeJgWPE= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-660-WkQsWsk3MCelwMjPRiD5ZA-1; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 10:31:50 -0400 X-MC-Unique: WkQsWsk3MCelwMjPRiD5ZA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: WkQsWsk3MCelwMjPRiD5ZA_1788964309 Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC723180ACCE; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.44.22.5]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75F8A1955D85; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 14C1721E6A04; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 16:31:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini , Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?= , Michael Roth , Pierrick Bouvier , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/75] qapi: add QAPITypeInfo struct definition In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau"'s message of "Wed, 9 Sep 2026 15:36:16 +0400") References: <20260904-qom-qapi-v4-0-a985f168e938@redhat.com> <20260904-qom-qapi-v4-1-a985f168e938@redhat.com> <87v78en3s2.fsf@pond.sub.org> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2026 16:31:43 +0200 Message-ID: <87zexqijhs.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 127.0.0.2 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: > Hi > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 2:00=E2=80=AFPM Markus Armbruster wrote: >> >> Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: >> >> > Introduce a minimal struct that pairs a QAPI type's internal name with >> > its "masked" introspection name. Generated constants of this type will >> > let QOM property registration carry a reliable reference to the QAPI >> > schema and possibly other associated data. >> > >> > The fields are populated in following commits. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau >> > --- >> > include/qapi/qapi-type-info.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/include/qapi/qapi-type-info.h b/include/qapi/qapi-type-in= fo.h >> > new file mode 100644 >> > index 000000000000..97eb1d7bf490 >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/include/qapi/qapi-type-info.h >> > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ >> > +/* >> > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later >> > + */ >> > + >> > +#ifndef QAPI_TYPE_INFO_H >> > +#define QAPI_TYPE_INFO_H >> > + >> > +#include "qapi/util.h" >> > + >> > +/** >> > + * QAPITypeInfo - QAPI type metadata >> > + * >> > + * @name: QAPI type name (e.g. "str", "OnOffAuto", "int32List"). >> > + * QOM uses this as the property type string. >> > + * @masked_name: Name of the type in the QAPI introspection schema, a= ssigned by >> > + * scripts/qapi code generator (e.g. "368"). >> > + * NULL for implicit types. >> >> I believe the last sentence is inaccurate. I can't see any QAPITypeInfo >> for implicit types, nor can I see any where .masked_name is null. > > Only QType, but since it has no use we can drop it from generation for no= w. Yes. QType is a weird special case. >> We discussed this in review of v2. You asked whether I think it should >> be mandatory, but I neglected to answer (my apologies), so you didn't >> change anything for now. Fair. >> >> If we really want to permit null, we need a more accurate comment. If >> we don't, we can simply drop the sentence. >> >> I guess the remaining motivation to permit null here comes from QOM >> introspection [PATCH 08]. There, you add optional member @qapi-type to >> ObjectPropertyInfo, documented to be absent if the type does not occur >> in the output of query-qmp-schema. >> >> @qapi-type is optional so we can QAPIfy QOM properties one by one. >> Three cases: >> >> 1. Not QAPIfied: the property's ObjectPropertyInfo has no QAPITypeInfo >> (member .qapi_type is null). @qapi-type is absent. >> >> 2. Fully QAPIfied: it has a QAPITypeInfo, and its .masked_name is >> non-null. @qapi-type is .masked_name. >> >> 3. Badly QAPIfied: it has a QAPITypeInfo, but it's useless: .masked_name >> is null. @qapi-type is absent. >> >> The code to compute @qapi-type is written the obvious way, and the >> obvious way just works for all three cases. Regardless, I don't think >> case 3 has a right to exist :) Why would we bother to tack a >> QAPITypeInfo to ObjectPropertyInfo when it's useless? > > ok, let's make masked_name mandatory > >> The only reason I can imagine is QAPIfication in two steps where the >> first one tacks on the QAPITypeInfo, and the second one adds its >> .masked_name. We go to case 2 via case 3. But why would we do step one >> without step 2? And if we do both, why not swap their order? >> >> Am I missing something? > > No, any other review in the series before I send a new revision? :) Just sent one. I'll work my way through this, but I can't predict how quickly. Do feel free to send new revisions. [...]