[libvirt] [PATCH 06/11] util: use glib base64 encoding/decoding APIs

[Daniel P. Berrangé]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:18:17PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-09-30 at 13:56 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:45:56PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 01:41:52PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 18:17:28 +0100, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> > > > > > @@ -698,23 +697,17 @@ virSecretObjSaveConfig(virSecretObjPtr obj)
> > > > > >  int
> > > > > >  virSecretObjSaveData(virSecretObjPtr obj)
> > > > > >  {
> > > > > > -    char *base64 = NULL;
> > > > > > -    int ret = -1;
> > > > > > +    g_autofree char *base64 = NULL;
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not a fan of adding another style here. Either use VIR_FREE(), or
> > > > > convert all VIR_FREE to g_autofree first.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm aware it will be unavoidable to use the glib auto pointer macro for
> > > > > complex types but we should at least here where it's interchangable have
> > > > > some kind of consistency.
> > > > 
> > > > Here I agree with Peter, for this series I would use VIR_FREE() where
> > > > it's possible and only for glib objects we can use g_autoptr.
> > > > 
> > > > But eventually I would like to switch to g_autofree and friends in order
> > > > to eliminate our specific helpers in favor of glib helpers.
> > > > 
> > > > This also brings a question if we should keep our wrappers for glib or
> > > > use it directly.  For example the string functions that we have.
> > > 
> > > Where any libvirt code just duplicates something that alrady exists, then
> > > I think there's no compelling reason to keep it, the best code is code
> > > that doesn't exist.
> > > 
> > > I don't want todo too many big bang replacements though, so I think best
> > > to deprecate existing libvirt code and phase it out incrementally in many
> > > cases.
> > 
> > Agreed, for now let's keep all the wrappers but eventually we can remove
> > them to make the code cleaner.
> 
> Note that we should be able to use VIR_AUTOPTR() instead of
> g_autoptr() even for objects, by simply registering the same
> GLib-provided free function with our own macros.
> 
> That way we could keep using VIR_AUTO* everywhere and then, when
> we're ready, mechanically switch everything to g_auto* in one fell
> swoop, without having any point in time where the two styles are
> coexisting.

That creates an even bigger conversion later. Such big conversions
cause more pain for backports, than doing an incremental conversion
at appropriate times.

Converting everything to g_autofree right now doesn't give style
consistency as we'd still be matching VIR_ALLOC + g_autofree,
so I don't see a benefit to a big conversion in 1 step.

Incrementally converting VIR_ALLOC + VIR_AUTOFREE at the same
time, makes more sense stylewise, as then within the scope of a
single method we'd be consistent.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|