[PATCH v2 5/9] qapi: Generalize struct member policy checking
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
philmd at redhat.com
Fri Oct 29 16:11:59 UTC 2021
On 10/29/21 16:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd at redhat.com> writes:
>
>> On 10/28/21 12:25, 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 at redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/qapi/visitor-impl.h | 6 ++++--
>>> include/qapi/visitor.h | 17 +++++++++++++----
>>> qapi/qapi-forward-visitor.c | 16 +++++++++-------
>>> qapi/qapi-visit-core.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
>>> qapi/qobject-input-visitor.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
>>> qapi/qobject-output-visitor.c | 9 ++++++---
>>> qapi/trace-events | 4 ++--
>>> scripts/qapi/visit.py | 14 +++++++-------
>>> 8 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>>> case COMPAT_POLICY_INPUT_CRASH:
>>
>> Clearer as:
>>
>> abort();
>> default:
>> g_assert_not_reached();
>
> Maybe, but making it so has nothing to do with this patch. It could
> perhaps be done in PATCH 8, or in a followup patch.
>
>> Otherwise,
>> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd at redhat.com>
>
> Okay to tack your R-by to the unmodified patch?
Sure.
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list