On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 05:29:38PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 06:26:21PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > Separate run of the script using the --force flag, for the cases
> > where the typedef wasn't found in the same header.
> 
> This scenario feels a little suspicious to me.
> 
> A bunch of these are caused because the typedef is put
> into qemu/typedefs.h.
> 
> Others simply look wrong.
> 
> I wonder if we're better off fixing all these exceptions
> so the typedef is in the expected place.

Yeah, it is a good idea to take a closer look on each of those
cases.  Many cases changed using --force had caused breakage, and
originated the fixes at the beginning of this series.

I will change the script to at least look at typedefs.h, so we
know which of those 59 cases are truly unsafe.  Maybe the list
that requires manual review will become much shorter.

-- 
Eduardo


Reply via email to