qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, pkrempa@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com,
	ehabkost@redhat.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com,
	libvir-list@redhat.com, kchamart@redhat.com,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	dgilbert@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, jsnow@redhat.com,
	libguestfs@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] qapi: Generalize struct member policy checking
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 18:13:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be222bd-e863-b58f-fdea-c562903f1eaa@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fssjc0a7.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>

On 10/29/21 17:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:25:16PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> The generated visitor functions call visit_deprecated_accept() and
>>> visit_deprecated() when visiting a struct member with special feature
>>> flag 'deprecated'.  This makes the feature flag visible to the actual
>>> visitors.  I want to make feature flag 'unstable' visible there as
>>> well, so I can add policy for it.
>>>
>>> To let me make it visible, replace these functions by
>>> visit_policy_reject() and visit_policy_skip(), which take the member's
>>> special features as an argument.  Note that the new functions have the
>>> opposite sense, i.e. the return value flips.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>
>>> +++ b/qapi/qapi-forward-visitor.c
>>> @@ -246,25 +246,27 @@ static void forward_field_optional(Visitor *v, const char *name, bool *present)
>>>      visit_optional(ffv->target, name, present);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -static bool forward_field_deprecated_accept(Visitor *v, const char *name,
>>> -                                            Error **errp)
>>> +static bool forward_field_policy_reject(Visitor *v, const char *name,
>>> +                                        unsigned special_features,
>>> +                                        Error **errp)
>>>  {
>>>      ForwardFieldVisitor *ffv = to_ffv(v);
>>>  
>>>      if (!forward_field_translate_name(ffv, &name, errp)) {
>>>          return false;
>>
>> Should this return value be flipped?
>>
>>>      }
>>> -    return visit_deprecated_accept(ffv->target, name, errp);
>>> +    return visit_policy_reject(ffv->target, name, special_features, errp);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -static bool forward_field_deprecated(Visitor *v, const char *name)
>>> +static bool forward_field_policy_skip(Visitor *v, const char *name,
>>> +                                      unsigned special_features)
>>>  {
>>>      ForwardFieldVisitor *ffv = to_ffv(v);
>>>  
>>>      if (!forward_field_translate_name(ffv, &name, NULL)) {
>>>          return false;
>>
>> and here too?
> 
> Good catch!

Ouch. I admit this patch logic is hard to review, but couldn't come
with a nice way to split it further.

> These functions are called indirectly like
> 
>     if (visit_policy_reject(v, "values", 1u << QAPI_DEPRECATED, errp)) {
>         return false;
>     }
>     if (!visit_policy_skip(v, "values", 1u << QAPI_DEPRECATED)) {
>         if (!visit_type_strList(v, "values", &obj->values, errp)) {
>             return false;
>         }
>     }
> 
> visit_policy_reject() must return true when it sets an error, or else we
> call visit_policy_skip() with @errp pointing to non-null.
> 
> Same argument for visit_policy_skip().
> 
>>>      }
>>> -    return visit_deprecated(ffv->target, name);
>>> +    return visit_policy_skip(ffv->target, name, special_features);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>
>> Otherwise, the rest of the logic changes for flipped sense look right.
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-29 16:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-28 10:25 [PATCH v2 0/9] Configurable policy for handling unstable interfaces Markus Armbruster
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] qapi: New special feature flag "unstable" Markus Armbruster
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] qapi: Mark unstable QMP parts with feature 'unstable' Markus Armbruster
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] qapi: Eliminate QCO_NO_OPTIONS for a slight simplification Markus Armbruster
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] qapi: Tools for sets of special feature flags in generated code Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 10:32   ` Juan Quintela
2021-10-29 11:33   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] qapi: Generalize struct member policy checking Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 10:42   ` Juan Quintela
2021-10-29 13:22     ` Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 13:31   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-29 14:01     ` Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 16:11       ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-29 15:20   ` Eric Blake
2021-10-29 15:34     ` Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 16:13       ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé [this message]
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] qapi: Generalize command " Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 10:44   ` Juan Quintela
2021-10-29 15:28   ` Eric Blake
2021-10-29 16:11     ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] qapi: Generalize enum member " Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 11:31   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] qapi: Factor out compat_policy_input_ok() Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 16:55   ` Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 17:01     ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-10-28 10:25 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] qapi: Extend -compat to set policy for unstable interfaces Markus Armbruster
2021-10-29 15:10   ` Eric Blake
2021-10-29 15:15     ` Markus Armbruster

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4be222bd-e863-b58f-fdea-c562903f1eaa@redhat.com \
    --to=philmd@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
    --cc=kchamart@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=libguestfs@redhat.com \
    --cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
    --cc=marcandre.lureau@redhat.com \
    --cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=pkrempa@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=quintela@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).