Re: [PATCH 2/3] net: Restore printing of the help text with "-nic help"

[Thomas Huth]

On 08/11/2022 10.49, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 11/4/22 13:57, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > Running QEMU with "-nic help" used to work in QEMU 5.2 and earlier versions
> > (it showed the available netdev backends), but this feature got broken during
> > some refactoring in version 6.0. Let's restore the old behavior, and while
> > we're at it, let's also print the available NIC models here now since this
> > option can be used to configure both, netdev backend and model in one go.
> >
> > Fixes: ad6f932fe8 ("net: do not exit on "netdev_add help" monitor command")
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >   net/net.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/net.c b/net/net.c
> > index c0516a8067..b4b8f2a9cc 100644
> > --- a/net/net.c
> > +++ b/net/net.c
> > @@ -1571,8 +1571,18 @@ static int net_param_nic(void *dummy, QemuOpts *opts, 
> > Error **errp)
> >       const char *type;
> >   
> >       type = qemu_opt_get(opts, "type");
> > -    if (type && g_str_equal(type, "none")) {
> > -        return 0;    /* Nothing to do, default_net is cleared in vl.c */
> > +    if (type) {
> > +        if (g_str_equal(type, "none")) {
> > +            return 0;    /* Nothing to do, default_net is cleared in vl.c */
> > +        }
> > +        if (is_help_option(type)) {
> > +            GPtrArray *nic_models = qemu_get_nic_models(TYPE_DEVICE);
> > +            show_netdevs();
> > +            printf("\n");
> > +            qemu_show_nic_models(type, (const char **)nic_models->pdata);
> > +            g_ptr_array_free(nic_models, true);
>
> nit: would not the order:
>
> > +            GPtrArray *nic_models;
> > +            show_netdevs();
> > +            printf("\n");
> > +            nic_models = qemu_get_nic_models(TYPE_DEVICE);
> > +            qemu_show_nic_models(type, (const char **)nic_models->pdata);
> > +            g_ptr_array_free(nic_models, true);
>
> flow more logically?

I think that's mostly a matter of taste ... and as long as the declaration 
of the variable has to stay at the top of the block (according to QEMU's 
coding style), I think I'd also prefer to keep the initialization there.

 Thomas