Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Add infrastructure for QIDL-based device serialization

[Michael Roth]

On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 02:33:52PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Michael Roth <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 05:57:42PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 21/09/2012 16:07, Michael Roth ha scritto:
> >> >
> >> >     QIDL_DECLARE(SerialDevice) {
> >> >         SysBusDevice parent;
> >> >
> >> >         uint8_t thr;              /* transmit holding register */
> >> >         uint8_t lsr;              /* line status register */
> >> >         uint8_t ier;              /* interrupt enable register */
> >> >
> >> >         int int_pending qDerived; /* whether we have a pending queued 
> >> > interrupt */
> >> >         CharDriverState *chr qImmutable; /* backend */
> >> >     };
> >>
> >> I thought we agreed on QIDL(derived), QIDL(immutable) etc.  These
> >> prefixes just do not scale...
> >
> > qImmutable gets defined as QIDL(immutable) via qidl.h, and underneath
> > the covers it's all QIDL(). So we can change them easily if need be, and
> > still have the optional of using QIDL() for any current or new
> > annotations that get introduced. But QIDL() just ends up being
> > really noisey in practice, especially when a field has multiple
> > annotations, so I'd like to make that kind of usage the exceptional
> > case rather than the common one.
> >
> > I went with qUppercase because it avoids all the previous issues with
> > using leading underscores, and it's reserved in terms of QEMU coding
> > guidelines as far as I can tell (we generally require leading capital
> > for typedefs and lowercase for variable names, and can work around
> > exceptions on a case by case basis by using QIDL() or some other name).
> > I also had it as q_* for a bit but that didn't seem much better on the
> > eyes we looking at converted structures.
> 
> It looks like Hungarian notation and very much unlike other QEMU code.
> I'd use q_ or qidl_ prefix instead, or rather QIDL().
> 

I wanted some way to distinguish from other qemu code to avoid conflicts,
but i think q_* seems reasonable if we reserve the prefix via CODING_STYLE.
Then for conflicts outside our control we can either use a different name
for the annotations or use the long-form QIDL() style depending on the
circumstances.

> >
> >>
> >> Paolo
> >>
>