[libvirt] [PATCH] schemas: Allow all generic elements and attributes for all interfaces

[Martin Kletzander]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 04:12:15PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>On 29.01.2015 11:25, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:23:08PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> There are some interface types (notably 'server' and 'client')
>>> which instead of allowing the default set of elements and
>>> attributes (like the rest do), try to enumerate only the elements
>>> they know of. This way it's, however, easy to miss something. For
>>> instance, the <address/> element was not mentioned at all. This
>>> resulted in a strange behavior: when such interface was added
>>> into XML, the address was automatically generated by parsing
>>> code. Later, the formatted XML hasn't passed the RNG schema. This
>>> became more visible once we've turned on the XML validation on
>>> domain XML changes: appending an empty line at the end of
>>> formatted XML (to trick virsh think the XML had changed) made
>>> libvirt to refuse the very same XML it formatted.
>>>
>>> Instead of trying to find each element and attribute we are
>>> missing in the schema, lets just allow all the elements and
>>> attributes like we're doing that for the rest of types. It's no
>>> harm if the schema is wider than our parser allows.
>>>
>>
>> I'm pretty sure that separating it was the original intention, but
>> until it's separated properly without breaking things, I agree with
>> this fix.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn at redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng                      |  28 +---
>>> .../qemuxml2argv-interface-server.xml              | 157
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> So this file is added only for domainschematest?  Why not check it by
>> xml2xml as well?
>
>Good point.
>
>>
>> This effectively allows interface-options to be used with any
>> interface, why not move it after the <choice/> element, so we're not
>> redundant?
>
>Not a good point. I mean, I don't think one is allowed to:
><element>
>  <interlave>
>    <choice>
>      <group/>
>      <group/>
>    <choice>
>  </interleave>
></element>
>
>simply because the choice groups may be defined by the value of an
>attribute to the top parent element. Well, at least if I did it that way
>I got an error from xmllint (and don't even get me started on it's error
>reporting capabilities. For a long while I thought we have the worst
>error reporting ever. Then I met xmllint).
>

Um... Yes!  And I've found out why.  It's simply because of that
reference to the 'interface-options' definition.  And you can't get
that info from xmllint.  Anyway, it is possible, albeit not so
beautiful patch-wise.  I'll Cc you on the patches that fix that.

>>
>> ACK if you fix those two things.
>
>So I'm fixing the first issue and pushing. Thanks.
>
>Michal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20150130/d46c29ea/attachment-0001.sig>