[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] QJSON: Use OBJECT_CHECK
From: |
Eduardo Habkost |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] QJSON: Use OBJECT_CHECK |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Apr 2015 09:55:48 -0300 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 08:38:02AM -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:23:20 -0300
> Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 07:05:55PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> > > Am 25.04.2015 um 17:28 schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> > > > The QJSON code used casts to (QJSON*) directly, instead of OBJECT_CHECK.
> > > > There were even some functions using object_dynamic_cast() calls
> > > > followed by assert(), which is exactly what OBJECT_CHECK does (by
> > > > calling object_dynamic_cast_assert()).
> > >
> > > Suggest s/OBJECT_CHECK/OBJECT_CHECK()/g everywhere for clarity.
>
> Everywhere? You mean, in other places? In this case someone has to
> post a different patch.
Just in the commit message.
>
> > I assume it can be fixed during commit by whoever is going to queue it.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
> > > > ---
> > > > qjson.c | 10 +++++-----
> > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <address@hidden>
> > >
> > > Wasn't aware QJSON is using QOM - assuming this will go through some
> > > QAPI/QMP tree.
> >
> > The only user of qjson.c right now is migration code. Should it go through
> > the migration tree?
>
> It could be, but I can take it if nobody does.
Thanks!
>
> > Also, why do we have two JSON writers in QEMU? And why do they have
> > exactly the same name?
>
> Not sure I got it, which writers?
qjson.c and qobject/qjson.c:to_json().
--
Eduardo