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=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 DD69BC433DB for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:18:47 +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 508A2619B4 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:18:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 508A2619B4 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]:35170 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlc4-0006BC-Vo for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:18:45 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35538) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOkXO-0003zc-Gm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:09:50 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:22164) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOkXM-00038e-CL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:09:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1616519387; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=RJhkmDDDt8JUFoUO80ZeRKr+scoQdarKzVdVWt3GV3Y=; b=cdeke4/HHhub1sJ9moK8ttzxVvWXVb7RSR06C/OJT2vWg2pKGcCgE0OoBiy4bBrSncQIg4 E2xtGKvc4mMgHWsBUY8dDIC428BqJ2OUBRDoU9keKn+qp1utJl4qPhpzqe6PsSuCbKqhqw eJtMf65fBABFwnEC2q95gND5t1sJ/kI= 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-39-HKWTTgrmP7Wc4dXU_ALMxQ-1; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:09:45 -0400 X-MC-Unique: HKWTTgrmP7Wc4dXU_ALMxQ-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 29E1E107ACCA; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.10.117.181] (ovpn-117-181.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.117.181]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7132610F3; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/28] tests/qapi-schema: Tweak to demonstrate buggy member name check To: Markus Armbruster References: <20210323094025.3569441-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20210323094025.3569441-7-armbru@redhat.com> <87im5hq3hs.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> From: John Snow Message-ID: <0b0ace70-cd33-0c3b-c099-2377ca48559f@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 13:09:40 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87im5hq3hs.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jsnow@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=jsnow@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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, 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: michael.roth@amd.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 3/23/21 11:44 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > John Snow writes: > >> On 3/23/21 5:40 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Member name 'u' and names starting with 'has-' or 'has_' are reserved >>> for the generator. check_type() enforces this, covered by tests >>> reserved-member-u and reserved-member-has. >>> These tests neglect to cover optional members, where the name starts >>> with '*'. Tweak reserved-member-u to fix that. >>> This demonstrates the reserved member name check is broken for >>> optional members. The next commit will fix it. >>> >> >> The test without an optional member goes away. Do we lose coverage? >> (Do we care?) > > Up to a point :) We do try to cover all failure modes, just not in all > contexts. > > The test is about this error: > > if c_name(key, False) == 'u' or c_name(key, False).startswith('has_'): > raise QAPISemError(info, "%s uses reserved name" % key_source) > > Full matrix: (is "u", starts with "has_") x (optional, not optional). > > Instead of covering all four cases, we cover two: non-optional "u" > (reserved-member-u) and non-optional "has-" (reserved-member-has). > > The patch flips the former to optional. The latter still covers > non-optional. > > Good enough, I think. > Relies a tiny bit on knowing these two reserved name checks are implemented in the same place. Doubt it'll matter practically. Coverage has increased overall. > Do you feel I should point to reserved-member-has in the commit message? > It'd be for my benefit, but you also already just explained it to me. Reviewed-by: John Snow