Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v9 25/27] qapi: Add positive tests to qapi-schema-test

[Markus Armbruster]

Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:

> Add positive tests to qapi-schema-test for things that were
> made possible by recent patches but which caused compile errors
> due to collisions prior to that point.  The focus is mainly on
> collisions due to names we have reserved for qapi, even though
> it is unlikely that anyone will want to abuse these names in
> actual .json files.
>
> The added tests includes:

Checking sanity aloud:

> Use of a member name ending in 'Kind' or 'List' [1, 4]

Reserved for type names, because we generate typedef FOOList for
['FOO'], and FOOKind for a simple union FOO.

> Use of a type name starting with 'has_' [1, 5]

Reserved for member names, because we generate has_FOO for an optional
member FOO in the same name space.

See below for union branch.

Could additionally test command and event names, but I very much doubt
that's worth the bother.

> Use of a type named 'u' [1, 6]
> Use of a union branch name of 'u' [2, 6]

Reserved for member names, because we generate u in the same name space
for unions.

> Use of a union branch name starting with 'has_' [2, 5]

See above.

> Use of an alternate branch name of 'max' [3]

I'd prefer keeping "branch name can't be MAX" as artificial restriction
just for similarity to unions.

> [1] Never broken, but could break if reservations are too strict
> [2] Broken prior to commit e4ba22b
> [3] Broken prior to previous commit
> [4] See reservations in commit 4dc2e69 and 255960d
> [5] See reservations in commit 9fb081e
> [6] See reservation in commit 5e59baf
>
> Not worth testing here: we no longer have a collision with a
> member named 'base' (commit ddf2190) or with a branch named
> 'type' (commit e4ba22b).
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>

Patch looks good.