| Message ID | 1488145424-14974-16-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 02/26/2017 03:43 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Commit 240f64b made all qobject input visitors created outside tests > strict, except for the one in object_property_set_qobject(). That one > was left behind only because Eric couldn't spare the time to figure > out whether making it strict would break anything, with a TODO > comment. Time to resolve it. > > Strict makes a difference only for otherwise successful visits of QAPI > structs or unions. Let's examine what the callers of > object_property_set_qobject() visit: > > * object_property_set_str(), object_property_set_bool(), > object_property_set_int() visit a QString, QBool, QInt, > respectively. Strictness can't matter. > > * qmp_qom_set visits its @value argument. Comes straight from QMP and > can be anything ('any' in the QAPI schema). Strictness matters when > the property's set() method visits a struct or union QAPI type. > > No such methods exist, thus switching to strict can't break > anything. > > If we acquire such methods in the future, we'll *want* the visitor > to be strict, so that unexpected members get rejected as they should > be. > > Switch to strict. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> > --- > qom/qom-qobject.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
diff --git a/qom/qom-qobject.c b/qom/qom-qobject.c index 447e4a0..bbdedda 100644 --- a/qom/qom-qobject.c +++ b/qom/qom-qobject.c @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ void object_property_set_qobject(Object *obj, QObject *value, const char *name, Error **errp) { Visitor *v; - /* TODO: Should we reject, rather than ignore, excess input? */ - v = qobject_input_visitor_new(value, false); + + v = qobject_input_visitor_new(value, true); object_property_set(obj, v, name, errp); visit_free(v); }
Commit 240f64b made all qobject input visitors created outside tests strict, except for the one in object_property_set_qobject(). That one was left behind only because Eric couldn't spare the time to figure out whether making it strict would break anything, with a TODO comment. Time to resolve it. Strict makes a difference only for otherwise successful visits of QAPI structs or unions. Let's examine what the callers of object_property_set_qobject() visit: * object_property_set_str(), object_property_set_bool(), object_property_set_int() visit a QString, QBool, QInt, respectively. Strictness can't matter. * qmp_qom_set visits its @value argument. Comes straight from QMP and can be anything ('any' in the QAPI schema). Strictness matters when the property's set() method visits a struct or union QAPI type. No such methods exist, thus switching to strict can't break anything. If we acquire such methods in the future, we'll *want* the visitor to be strict, so that unexpected members get rejected as they should be. Switch to strict. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> --- qom/qom-qobject.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)