On 18.01.2023 19:21, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 05:21:32PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 16/01/2023 6:10 pm, Anthony PERARD wrote: >>> +def get_typedefs(tokens): >>> + level = 1 >>> + state = 0 >>> + typedefs = [] >> >> I'm pretty sure typedefs actually wants to be a dict rather than a list >> (will have better "id in typedefs" performance lower down), but that >> wants matching with code changes elsewhere, and probably wants doing >> separately. > > I'm not sure that going to make a difference to have "id in ()" instead > of "id in []". I just found out that `typedefs` is always empty... > > I don't know what get_typedefs() is supposed to do, or at least if it > works as expected, because it always returns "" or an empty list. (even > the shell version) > > So, it would actually be a bit faster to not call get_typedefs(), but I > don't know if that's safe.
There's exactly one instance that this would take care of: typedef XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(char) tmem_cli_va_t; But tmem.h isn't being processed anymore, and hence right now the list would always be empty. Are we going to be able to guarantee that going forward? Jan
