Re: [PATCH 09/11] char-socket: Fix qemu_chr_socket_address() for abstract sockets

[Markus Armbruster]

Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> writes:

> On 10/29/20 8:38 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Commit 776b97d360 "qemu-sockets: add abstract UNIX domain socket
>> support" neglected to update qemu_chr_socket_address().  It shows
>> shows neither @abstract nor @tight.  Fix that.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  chardev/char-socket.c | 10 +++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>
>> +++ b/chardev/char-socket.c
>> @@ -443,10 +443,18 @@ static char *qemu_chr_socket_address(SocketChardev *s, 
>> const char *prefix)
>>                                 s->is_listen ? ",server" : "");
>>          break;
>>      case SOCKET_ADDRESS_TYPE_UNIX:
>> -        return g_strdup_printf("%sunix:%s%s", prefix,
>> +    {
>> +        UnixSocketAddress *sa = &s->addr->u.q_unix;
>> +
>> +        return g_strdup_printf("%sunix:%s%s%s%s", prefix,
>>                                 s->addr->u.q_unix.path,
>> +                               sa->has_abstract && sa->abstract
>> +                               ? ",abstract" : "",
>> +                               sa->has_tight && sa->tight
>> +                               ? ",tight" : "",
>
> Why are we appending ',tight' when it is not abstract?  tight only makes
> a difference for abstract sockets, so omitting it for normal sockets
> makes more sense.

We don't bother to reject @tight when @abstract is false.  Not bothering
to suppress it here is consistently careless.

I'm trying to make this pig less wrong, I'm not trying to make it less
ugly.

> Or put another way, why are we using 2 bools to represent three sensible
> states, instead of a single 3-state enum?

Because the QAPI interface got merged without proper review by the QAPI
maintainers?

>>                                 s->is_listen ? ",server" : "");
>>          break;
>> +    }
>>      case SOCKET_ADDRESS_TYPE_FD:
>>          return g_strdup_printf("%sfd:%s%s", prefix, s->addr->u.fd.str,
>>                                 s->is_listen ? ",server" : "");
>>