On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:12:45AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 02:50:06PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 07:14:09PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > This introduces the use of the OBJECT_DEFINE and OBJECT_DECLARE macro > > > families in the secret types, in order to eliminate boilerplate code. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > crypto/secret.c | 24 ++++-------------------- > > > crypto/secret_common.c | 32 +++++++++----------------------- > > > crypto/secret_keyring.c | 28 +++++++++------------------- > > > include/crypto/secret.h | 11 ++--------- > > > include/crypto/secret_common.h | 13 ++----------- > > > include/crypto/secret_keyring.h | 18 ++---------------- > > > 6 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-) > > > > > > > Beautiful. > > > > I wonder how hard it would be to automate this. I'm assuming > > Coccinelle won't be able to deal with the macro definitions, but > > a handwritten conversion script would be really useful for > > dealing with our 1226 static TypeInfo structs. > > Probably possible to do a reasonably good job with a perl script or > similar. The code patterns to be replaced are reasonably easy to > identify with a few regexes.
I've attempted to parse all the TypeInfo structs in the tree. The data I've extracted is available at: https://gist.github.com/ehabkost/7a398640492f369685c789ffed0f67aa It turns out 230 of our 1259 TypeInfo variables don't have instance_size set and don't have their own struct type defined. We could: * Make that a supported use case, and add helper macros that don't require MyDevice to be defined; * Make that not supported, and convert those 230 types automatically; or * Make that not supported, and convert those 230 types manually. -- Eduardo
