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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FB1BC433F5 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:25:59 +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 21AB761167 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:25:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 21AB761167 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:42150 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgRtN-0005pI-SK for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:25:57 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56628) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgRr9-0003wv-BU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:23:42 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:43104) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgRr5-00045P-JG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:23:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1635513813; 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=ymZIPVWB7rlLQhIE0bXPQD+Oi072OSnFOlPU3BTE1cw=; b=CVmbNxD8EwCDRs0bVaHW/wu7EIdH82Q64hnROlgIvyAv3IgpUv7Dbsr1sKYaLLERt9SczN /b3KjhG/AnZ2Y4ZiuY+Q8lMHNKh/m28NdIzEuH8v9tI99Y0tZHAXiLyjIqjo1N8Eyx1maH QzvU1eGcoutwAJN8fw9j0ZZrrc9WNCY= 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-545-KUfv1dAJO7OrKHh6EnPBqA-1; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:23:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KUfv1dAJO7OrKHh6EnPBqA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05074BBEE6; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:23:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-112-7.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.7]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0333260C13; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8DECE11380A7; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 15:22:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: Juan Quintela Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] qapi: Generalize struct member policy checking References: <20211028102520.747396-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20211028102520.747396-6-armbru@redhat.com> <87tuh0t8n2.fsf@secure.mitica> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 15:22:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87tuh0t8n2.fsf@secure.mitica> (Juan Quintela's message of "Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:42:09 +0200") Message-ID: <87zgqsdkyb.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 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=216.205.24.124; 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_H2=-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: kwolf@redhat.com, pkrempa@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com, ehabkost@redhat.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org, kchamart@redhat.com, libvir-list@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com, philmd@redhat.com, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, dgilbert@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, jsnow@redhat.com, libguestfs@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Juan Quintela writes: > 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 > > Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela > > Reversing accept/reject make things "interesting" for a review point of view. Sorry about that. >> + * @special_features is the member's special features encoded as a >> + * bitset of QapiSpecialFeature. > > Just to nitty pick, if you rename the variable to features, does the > sentece is clearer? Not to me, I'm afraid... Thanks!