On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:12:45AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
Checking that the derived class is larger than the requested parent class saves us from some obvious mistakes, but as written, it does not catch all the cases; in particular, it is easy to forget to update a VIR_CLASS_NEW when changing the 'parent' member from virObject to virObjectLockabale, but where the size checks don't catch that. Add a parameter for one more layer of sanity checking.Note that I did NOT change the fact that we require derived classes to be larger (as the difference in size makes it easy to tell classes apart), which means that even if a derived class has no functionality to add (but rather exists for compiler-enforced type-safety), it must still include a dummy member. But I did fix the wording of the error message to match the code. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> --- Here's hoping Coverity doesn't have a false-positive complaint about the error message being a potential dereference of NULL (the only time 'parent == NULL' is when 'parentsize == 0', based on the fact that our syntax checks forbid raw calls to virClassNew() except for "virObject" itself - but Coverity likely won't see that). src/util/virobject.h | 5 ++++- src/util/virobject.c | 8 +++++--- 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jto...@redhat.com> Jano
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
