Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 15/18] qapi: Move duplicate member checks to schema check()

[Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>]

Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:

> On 10/13/2015 11:13 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> I've come to the conclusion that we should get rid of the self-inflicted
>>>> pain before we attempt to detect all collisions.
>>>
>>> Then that sounds like I should try harder to get the kind/type naming,
>>> the boxed base naming, and even the anonymous union naming all hoisted
>>> into this subset, and spin a v9?
>> 
>> I can take PATCH 01-09,12 into my tree right away, with PATCH 07's two
>> redundant is_implicit() methods dropped, and PATCH 12's comment touched
>> up.
>
> Okay.

Done & pushed to http://repo.or.cz/qemu/armbru.git branch qapi-next.

>> 
>> I could take PATCH 10, but let's at least try to make a plan for
>> c_name() first.  If we fail, I'll take the patch, perhaps less the % to
>> + change, and we'll revisit c_name() later when we see more clearly.
>
> At this point, I'm not sure whether 10 disappears completely after the
> type/kind fix, so that alone is a good enough reason to leave 10 out of
> your tree for another round.
>
>> 
>> You want to move PATCH 11 to later in the queue, and I like that.
>> 
>> PATCH 13 needs a fix squashed in, and a few nits touched up.  If you
>> want me to do that on commit, please propose a patch for me to squash
>> in.  But a respin is probably easier for all.
>> 
>> PATCH 14 is fine, but it depends on 13.
>> 
>> I haven't finished review of PATCH 15-18.
>> 
>> Taken together, I think the easiest way forward is I take 01-09,12, and
>> you respin the rest after we finish its review.  Makes sense?
>> 
>
> Sounds like we're agreed then: take the obvious patches into your tree,
> and let me rework the tail of this subset on top of cleanups that reduce
> self-inflicted collisions.

Yes, please.  I'll try to review v8 16-18 quickly.