On 10/29/21 16:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd(a)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(a)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(a)redhat.com>
Okay to tack your R-by to the unmodified patch?
Sure.