[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 19/36] qdev: Move array property creation/registration to sep

From: Marc-André Lureau
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/36] qdev: Move array property creation/registration to separate functions
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:10:26 +0400

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 2:03 PM Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 2:17 AM Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote:
The array property registration code is hard to follow.  Move the
two steps into separate functions that have clear

Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
 hw/core/qdev-properties.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/core/qdev-properties.c b/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
index 27c09255d7..1f06dfb5d5 100644
--- a/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
+++ b/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
@@ -588,6 +588,32 @@ typedef struct {
     ObjectPropertyRelease *release;
 } ArrayElementProperty;

+ * Create ArrayElementProperty based on array length property
+ * @array_len_prop (which was previously defined using DEFINE_PROP_ARRAY()).
+ */

(some day we will have to clarify our API doc style, but not now ;)

Actually, I didn't realize but we do use kerneldoc in sphinx nowadays.

Peter, shouldn't you have updated CODING_STYLE.rst to say explicitly that our C API should be documented with it?

How do we enforce or check the comment style across the code base, or per-files (without necessarily including it in the generated manual/doc)?


Marc-André Lureau

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]