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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63201C433ED for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:47:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBB99613B6 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:47:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CBB99613B6 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:35906 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWwiR-00054A-N2 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 03:47:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34402) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWwfp-000375-Hd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 03:44:25 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:47360) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWwfn-0004zY-PA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 03:44:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1618472662; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CPYZyj3JYehJvrgfPZB466pBG5U1RDr5+pkJtOPvUps=; b=ZbzBLPeT34VkRfJBL5vDT3w33y3UlEEu8ZRvssduPalw3WyyWKZP+lsPGxahwbsvit6Nsj FaVatfZYiycxkeM6O6FY2DrEKdzIPUifjTXyubqQ9CBCwPWPeMzarQGC4oPaIE4DPl1Nl3 Iiio3UPb6kiJVKO/+eGa25CGT2c5+3A= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-146-5zgyiT_CNqWx4dneBIfPaw-1; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 03:44:18 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 5zgyiT_CNqWx4dneBIfPaw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 990898030C4; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-114-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BDA010074E1; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8B0ED113525D; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 09:44:15 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: Thomas Huth Subject: Re: [PATCH for-6.1 3/4] qapi/qom.json: Do not use CONFIG_VIRTIO_CRYPTO in common code References: <20210414112004.943383-1-thuth@redhat.com> <20210414112004.943383-4-thuth@redhat.com> <87tuo9j7hw.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 09:44:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Thomas Huth's message of "Thu, 15 Apr 2021 08:15:55 +0200") Message-ID: <875z0of0vk.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain 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: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?=" , Eduardo Habkost , Juan Quintela , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Cameron Esfahani , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Roman Bolshakov , Wenchao Wang , Paolo Bonzini , Sunil Muthuswamy , Colin Xu Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Thomas Huth writes: > On 14/04/2021 15.55, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Thomas Huth writes: >> >>> The ObjectType enum and ObjectOptions are included from qapi-types-qom.h >>> into common code. We should not use target-specific config switches like >>> CONFIG_VIRTIO_CRYPTO here, since this is not defined in common code and >>> thus the enum will look differently between common and target specific >>> code. For this case, it's hopefully enough to check for CONFIG_VHOST_CRYPTO >>> only (which is a host specific config switch, i.e. it's the same on all >>> targets). >> >> Drawback: introspection now claims cryptodev-vhost-user is among the >> values of qom-type, which is a lie when !defined(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CRYPTO). >> >> Is this the first lie about QOM object types? >> >> Do we care? > > I don't think we really care, since there are other entries in the list > which are obviously only available on certain targets or configurations, but > not fenced with "if"s, e.g. s390-pv-guest, input-linux or rng-random. So introspection already flawed, and adding another instance doesn't really make it worse. > Or do you see a special problem with cryptodev-vhost-user here? No, only the general problem that query-qmp-schema can't reliably tell us what QOM types are available. I see no need to revert the patch. >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth >>> --- >>> qapi/qom.json | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/qapi/qom.json b/qapi/qom.json >>> index db5ac419b1..cd0e76d564 100644 >>> --- a/qapi/qom.json >>> +++ b/qapi/qom.json >>> @@ -752,7 +752,7 @@ >>> 'cryptodev-backend', >>> 'cryptodev-backend-builtin', >>> { 'name': 'cryptodev-vhost-user', >>> - 'if': 'defined(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CRYPTO) && defined(CONFIG_VHOST_CRYPTO)' }, >>> + 'if': 'defined(CONFIG_VHOST_CRYPTO)' }, >>> 'dbus-vmstate', >>> 'filter-buffer', >>> 'filter-dump', >>> @@ -809,7 +809,7 @@ >>> 'cryptodev-backend': 'CryptodevBackendProperties', >>> 'cryptodev-backend-builtin': 'CryptodevBackendProperties', >>> 'cryptodev-vhost-user': { 'type': 'CryptodevVhostUserProperties', >>> - 'if': 'defined(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CRYPTO) && defined(CONFIG_VHOST_CRYPTO)' }, >>> + 'if': 'defined(CONFIG_VHOST_CRYPTO)' }, >>> 'dbus-vmstate': 'DBusVMStateProperties', >>> 'filter-buffer': 'FilterBufferProperties', >>> 'filter-dump': 'FilterDumpProperties', >> >> Could CryptodevVhostUserProperties be conditional, too? > > That's certainly a question for the QOM experts here... Here's the expert's method to find out: slap on the conditional, compile with all targets enabled, see whether any of them explode. Mind to try?