| /openbmc/qemu/tests/qapi-schema/ |
| H A D | alternate-conflict-num-string.json | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-bool-string.json | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-bool.json | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-int.json | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-num-string.out | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-bool-string.out | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-bool.out | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-int.out | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-bool-string.err | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-int.err | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-enum-bool.err | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-num-string.err | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-dict.json | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-string.json | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | alternate-conflict-string.err | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | qapi-schema-test.json | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | qapi-schema-test.out | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| /openbmc/qemu/util/ |
| H A D | keyval.c | c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|
| /openbmc/qemu/tests/ |
| H A D | Makefile.include | fda72ab4 Mon Jul 17 13:09:26 CDT 2017 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> qapi: Fix error handling code on alternate conflict
The conflict check added by commit c0644771 ("qapi: Reject
alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()") doesn't work
with the following declaration:
{ 'alternate': 'Alt',
'data': { 'one': 'bool',
'two': 'str' } }
It crashes with:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./scripts/qapi-types.py", line 295, in <module>
schema = QAPISchema(input_file)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 1468, in __init__
self.exprs = check_exprs(parser.exprs)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 958, in check_exprs
check_alternate(expr, info)
File "/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/scripts/qapi.py", line 830, in check_alternate
% (name, key, types_seen[qtype]))
KeyError: 'QTYPE_QSTRING'
This happens because the previously-seen conflicting member
('one') can't be found at types_seen[qtype], but at
types_seen['QTYPE_BOOL'].
Fix the bug by moving the error check to the same loop that adds
new items to types_seen, raising an exception if types_seen[qt]
is already set.
Add two additional test cases that can detect the bug.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170717180926.14924-1-ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
c0644771 Mon May 22 11:42:15 CDT 2017 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> qapi: Reject alternates that can't work with keyval_parse()
Alternates are sum types like unions, but use the JSON type on the
wire / QType in QObject instead of an explicit tag. That's why we
require alternate members to have distinct QTypes.
The recently introduced keyval_parse() (commit d454dbe) can only
produce string scalars. The qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval() input
visitor mostly hides the difference, so code using a QObject input
visitor doesn't have to care whether its input was parsed from JSON or
KEY=VALUE,... The difference leaks for alternates, as noted in commit
0ee9ae7: a non-string, non-enum scalar alternate value can't currently
be expressed.
In part, this is just our insufficiently sophisticated implementation.
Consider alternate type 'GuestFileWhence'. It has an integer member
and a 'QGASeek' member. The latter is an enumeration with values
'set', 'cur', 'end'. The meaning of b=set, b=cur, b=end, b=0, b=1 and
so forth is perfectly obvious. However, our current implementation
falls apart at run time for b=0, b=1, and so forth. Fixable, but not
today; add a test case and a TODO comment.
Now consider an alternate type with a string and an integer member.
What's the meaning of a=42? Is it the string "42" or the integer 42?
Whichever meaning you pick makes the other inexpressible. This isn't
just an implementation problem, it's fundamental. Our current
implementation will pick string.
So far, we haven't needed such alternates. To make sure we stop and
think before we add one that cannot sanely work with keyval_parse(),
let's require alternate members to have sufficiently distinct
representation in KEY=VALUE,... syntax:
* A string member clashes with any other scalar member
* An enumeration member clashes with bool members when it has value
'on' or 'off'.
* An enumeration member clashes with numeric members when it has a
value that starts with '-', '+', or a decimal digit. This is a
rather lazy approximation of the actual number syntax accepted by
the visitor.
Note that enumeration values starting with '-' and '+' are rejected
elsewhere already, but better safe than sorry.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1495471335-23707-5-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
|