On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 14:46:38 +0200 Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 29.04.2015 um 14:38 schrieb Luiz Capitulino: > > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:23:20 -0300 > > Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 07:05:55PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>> Am 25.04.2015 um 17:28 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > >>>> The QJSON code used casts to (QJSON*) directly, instead of OBJECT_CHECK. > >>>> There were even some functions using object_dynamic_cast() calls > >>>> followed by assert(), which is exactly what OBJECT_CHECK does (by > >>>> calling object_dynamic_cast_assert()). > >>> > >>> Suggest s/OBJECT_CHECK/OBJECT_CHECK()/g everywhere for clarity. > > > > Everywhere? You mean, in other places? > > No, I count 3x in commit message including subject. Ah, the problem is the *commit* message. Okay... > > Andreas > > > In this case someone has to > > post a different patch. > > > >> I assume it can be fixed during commit by whoever is going to queue it. > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> qjson.c | 10 +++++----- > >>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> > >>> > >>> Wasn't aware QJSON is using QOM - assuming this will go through some > >>> QAPI/QMP tree. > >> > >> The only user of qjson.c right now is migration code. Should it go through > >> the migration tree? > > > > It could be, but I can take it if nobody does. > > > >> Also, why do we have two JSON writers in QEMU? And why do they have > >> exactly the same name? > > > > Not sure I got it, which writers? > > > >
