HACKING 31.2 KB
Newer Older
1
-*- buffer-read-only: t -*- vi: set ro:
2 3
DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE!  IT IS GENERATED AUTOMATICALLY
from docs/hacking.html.in!
4

5 6 7 8 9


                         Contributor guidelines
                         ======================

10 11


12 13
General tips for contributing patches
=====================================
14 15
(1) Discuss any large changes on the mailing list first. Post patches early and
listen to feedback.
16

E
Eric Blake 已提交
17 18 19 20 21 22
(2) Post patches in unified diff format, with git rename detection enabled. You
need a one-time setup of:

  git config diff.renames true

After that, a command similar to this should work:
23 24 25 26 27

  diff -urp libvirt.orig/ libvirt.modified/ > libvirt-myfeature.patch

or:

28
  git diff > libvirt-myfeature.patch
29

E
Eric Blake 已提交
30 31 32
Also, for code motion patches, you may find that "git diff --patience"
provides an easier-to-read patch. However, the usual workflow of libvirt
developer is:
33 34 35 36 37 38

  git checkout master
  git pull
  git checkout -t origin -b workbranch
  Hack, committing any changes along the way

E
Eric Blake 已提交
39 40
More hints on compiling can be found here <compiling.html>. When you want to
post your patches:
41 42 43

  git pull --rebase
  (fix any conflicts)
44 45
  git send-email --cover-letter --no-chain-reply-to --annotate \
                 --to=libvir-list@redhat.com master
46

47 48 49 50 51 52
(Note that the "git send-email" subcommand may not be in the main git package
and using it may require installion of a separate package, for example the
"git-email" package in Fedora.) For a single patch you can omit
"--cover-letter", but a series of two or more patches needs a cover letter. If
you get tired of typing "--to=libvir-list@redhat.com" designation you can set
it in git config:
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68

  git config sendemail.to libvir-list@redhat.com

Please follow this as close as you can, especially the rebase and git
send-email part, as it makes life easier for other developers to review your
patch set. One should avoid sending patches as attachments, but rather send
them in email body along with commit message. If a developer is sending
another version of the patch (e.g. to address review comments), he is advised
to note differences to previous versions after the "---" line in the patch so
that it helps reviewers but doesn't become part of git history. Moreover, such
patch needs to be prefixed correctly with "--subject-prefix=PATCHv2" appended
to "git send-email" (substitute "v2" with the correct version if needed
though).



E
Eric Blake 已提交
69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
(3) In your commit message, make the summary line reasonably short (60 characters
is typical), followed by a blank line, followed by any longer description of
why your patch makes sense. If the patch fixes a regression, and you know what
commit introduced the problem, mentioning that is useful. If the patch
resolves a bugzilla report, mentioning the URL of the bug number is useful;
but also summarize the issue rather than making all readers follow the link.
You can use 'git shortlog -30' to get an idea of typical summary lines.
Libvirt does not currently attach any meaning to Signed-off-by: lines, so it
is up to you if you want to include or omit them in the commit message.



(4) Split large changes into a series of smaller patches, self-contained if
82
possible, with an explanation of each patch and an explanation of how the
83
sequence of patches fits together. Moreover, please keep in mind that it's
84 85 86 87 88
required to be able to compile cleanly (*including* "make check" and "make
syntax-check") after each patch. A feature does not have to work until the end
of a series, but intermediate patches must compile and not cause test-suite
failures (this is to preserve the usefulness of "git bisect", among other
things).
89 90


91

E
Eric Blake 已提交
92
(5) Make sure your patches apply against libvirt GIT. Developers only follow GIT
93
and don't care much about released versions.
94

E
Eric Blake 已提交
95
(6) Run the automated tests on your code before submitting any changes. In
96 97
particular, configure with compile warnings set to -Werror. This is done
automatically for a git checkout; from a tarball, use:
98

99
  ./configure --enable-werror
100 101 102 103 104 105 106

and run the tests:

  make check
  make syntax-check
  make -C tests valgrind

E
Eric Blake 已提交
107 108
Valgrind <http://valgrind.org/> is a test that checks for memory management
issues, such as leaks or use of uninitialized variables.
109

110 111 112 113 114 115 116
If you encounter any failing tests, the VIR_TEST_DEBUG environment variable
may provide extra information to debug the failures. Larger values of
VIR_TEST_DEBUG may provide larger amounts of information:

  VIR_TEST_DEBUG=1 make check    (or)
  VIR_TEST_DEBUG=2 make check

117
Also, individual tests can be run from inside the "tests/" directory, like:
118 119 120

  ./qemuxml2xmltest

E
Eric Blake 已提交
121 122
There is also a "./run" script at the top level, to make it easier to run
programs that have not yet been installed, as well as to wrap invocations of
123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182
various tests under gdb or Valgrind.



(7) The Valgrind test should produce similar output to "make check". If the output
has traces within libvirt API's, then investigation is required in order to
determine the cause of the issue. Output such as the following indicates some
sort of leak:

==5414== 4 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 3 of 89
==5414==    at 0x4A0881C: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==5414==    by 0x34DE0AAB85: xmlStrndup (in /usr/lib64/libxml2.so.2.7.8)
==5414==    by 0x4CC97A6: virDomainVideoDefParseXML (domain_conf.c:7410)
==5414==    by 0x4CD581D: virDomainDefParseXML (domain_conf.c:10188)
==5414==    by 0x4CD8C73: virDomainDefParseNode (domain_conf.c:10640)
==5414==    by 0x4CD8DDB: virDomainDefParse (domain_conf.c:10590)
==5414==    by 0x41CB1D: testCompareXMLToArgvHelper (qemuxml2argvtest.c:100)
==5414==    by 0x41E20F: virtTestRun (testutils.c:161)
==5414==    by 0x41C7CB: mymain (qemuxml2argvtest.c:866)
==5414==    by 0x41E84A: virtTestMain (testutils.c:723)
==5414==    by 0x34D9021734: (below main) (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.15.so)

In this example, the "virDomainDefParseXML()" had an error path where the
"virDomainVideoDefPtr video" pointer was not properly disposed. By simply
adding a "virDomainVideoDefFree(video);" in the error path, the issue was
resolved.

Another common mistake is calling a printing function, such as "VIR_DEBUG()"
without initializing a variable to be printed. The following example involved
a call which could return an error, but not set variables passed by reference
to the call. The solution was to initialize the variables prior to the call.

==4749== Use of uninitialised value of size 8
==4749==    at 0x34D904650B: _itoa_word (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.15.so)
==4749==    by 0x34D9049118: vfprintf (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.15.so)
==4749==    by 0x34D9108F60: __vasprintf_chk (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.15.so)
==4749==    by 0x4CAEEF7: virVasprintf (stdio2.h:199)
==4749==    by 0x4C8A55E: virLogVMessage (virlog.c:814)
==4749==    by 0x4C8AA96: virLogMessage (virlog.c:751)
==4749==    by 0x4DA0056: virNetTLSContextCheckCertKeyUsage (virnettlscontext.c:225)
==4749==    by 0x4DA06DB: virNetTLSContextCheckCert (virnettlscontext.c:439)
==4749==    by 0x4DA1620: virNetTLSContextNew (virnettlscontext.c:562)
==4749==    by 0x4DA26FC: virNetTLSContextNewServer (virnettlscontext.c:927)
==4749==    by 0x409C39: testTLSContextInit (virnettlscontexttest.c:467)
==4749==    by 0x40AB8F: virtTestRun (testutils.c:161)

Valgrind will also find some false positives or code paths which cannot be
resolved by making changes to the libvirt code. For these paths, it is
possible to add a filter to avoid the errors. For example:

==4643== 7 bytes in 1 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 4 of 20
==4643==    at 0x4A0881C: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:270)
==4643==    by 0x34D90853F1: strdup (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.15.so)
==4643==    by 0x34EEC2C08A: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4643==    by 0x34EEC15B81: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libnl.so.1.1)
==4643==    by 0x34D8C0EE15: call_init.part.0 (in /usr/lib64/ld-2.15.so)
==4643==    by 0x34D8C0EECF: _dl_init (in /usr/lib64/ld-2.15.so)
==4643==    by 0x34D8C01569: ??? (in /usr/lib64/ld-2.15.so)


183
In this instance, it is acceptable to modify the "tests/.valgrind.supp" file
184 185 186
in order to add a suppression filter. The filter should be unique enough to
not suppress real leaks, but it should be generic enough to cover multiple
code paths. The format of the entry can be found in the documentation found at
E
Eric Blake 已提交
187 188
the Valgrind home page <http://valgrind.org/>. The following trace was added
to "tests/.valgrind.supp" in order to suppress the warning:
189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200

{
    dlInitMemoryLeak1
    Memcheck:Leak
    fun:?alloc
    ...
    fun:call_init.part.0
    fun:_dl_init
    ...
    obj:*/lib*/ld-2.*so*
}

201 202


203
(8) Update tests and/or documentation, particularly if you are adding a new
204
feature or changing the output of a program.
205 206


207

208
There is more on this subject, including lots of links to background reading
E
Eric Blake 已提交
209 210
on the subject, on Richard Jones' guide to working with open source projects
<http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/how-to-supply-code-to-open-source-projects/>.
211

212

213 214 215
Code indentation
================
Libvirt's C source code generally adheres to some basic code-formatting
216 217 218 219
conventions. The existing code base is not totally consistent on this front,
but we do prefer that contributed code be formatted similarly. In short, use
spaces-not-TABs for indentation, use 4 spaces for each indentation level, and
other than that, follow the K&R style.
220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232

If you use Emacs, add the following to one of one of your start-up files
(e.g., ~/.emacs), to help ensure that you get indentation right:

  ;;; When editing C sources in libvirt, use this style.
  (defun libvirt-c-mode ()
    "C mode with adjusted defaults for use with libvirt."
    (interactive)
    (c-set-style "K&R")
    (setq indent-tabs-mode nil) ; indent using spaces, not TABs
    (setq c-indent-level 4)
    (setq c-basic-offset 4))
  (add-hook 'c-mode-hook
233 234 235
            '(lambda () (if (string-match "/libvirt" (buffer-file-name))
                            (libvirt-c-mode))))

236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257
If you use vim, append the following to your ~/.vimrc file:

  set nocompatible
  filetype on
  set autoindent
  set smartindent
  set cindent
  set tabstop=8
  set shiftwidth=4
  set expandtab
  set cinoptions=(0,:0,l1,t0
  filetype plugin indent on
  au FileType make setlocal noexpandtab
  au BufRead,BufNewFile *.am setlocal noexpandtab
  match ErrorMsg /\s\+$\| \+\ze\t/

Or if you don't want to mess your ~/.vimrc up, you can save the above into a
file called .lvimrc (not .vimrc) located at the root of libvirt source, then
install a vim script from
http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1408, which will load the
.lvimrc only when you edit libvirt code.

258 259 260

Code formatting (especially for new code)
=========================================
261 262 263
With new code, we can be even more strict. Please apply the following function
(using GNU indent) to any new code. Note that this also gives you an idea of
the type of spacing we prefer around operators and keywords:
264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271

  indent-libvirt()
  {
    indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 \
      -sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc \
      --no-tabs "$@"
  }

272 273 274
Note that sometimes you'll have to post-process that output further, by piping
it through "expand -i", since some leading TABs can get through. Usually
they're in macro definitions or strings, and should be converted anyhow.
275

276 277 278 279 280 281
Libvirt requires a C99 compiler for various reasons. However, most of the code
base prefers to stick to C89 syntax unless there is a compelling reason
otherwise. For example, it is preferable to use "/* */" comments rather than
"//". Also, when declaring local variables, the prevailing style has been to
declare them at the beginning of a scope, rather than immediately before use.

282

283 284 285
Bracket spacing
===============
The keywords "if", "for", "while", and "switch" must have a single space
M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
286
following them before the opening bracket. E.g.
287 288 289 290

      if(foo)   // Bad
      if (foo)  // Good

M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
291
Function implementations mustnothave any whitespace between the function name and the opening bracket. E.g.
292 293 294 295

      int foo (int wizz)  // Bad
      int foo(int wizz)   // Good

M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
296
Function calls mustnothave any whitespace between the function name and the opening bracket. E.g.
297 298 299 300 301

      bar = foo (wizz);  // Bad
      bar = foo(wizz);   // Good

Function typedefs mustnothave any whitespace between the closing bracket of the function name and
M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
302
opening bracket of the arg list. E.g.
303 304 305 306 307

      typedef int (*foo) (int wizz);  // Bad
      typedef int (*foo)(int wizz);   // Good

There must not be any whitespace immediately following any opening bracket, or
M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
308
immediately prior to any closing bracket. E.g.
309 310 311 312 313

      int foo( int wizz );  // Bad
      int foo(int wizz);    // Good


314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336
Semicolons
==========
Semicolons should never have a space beforehand. Inside the condition of a
"for" loop, there should always be a space or line break after each semicolon,
except for the special case of an infinite loop (although more infinite loops
use "while"). While not enforced, loop counters generally use post-increment.

      for (i = 0 ;i < limit ; ++i) { // Bad
      for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) { // Good
      for (;;) { // ok
      while (1) { // Better

Empty loop bodies are better represented with curly braces and a comment,
although use of a semicolon is not currently rejected.

      while ((rc = waitpid(pid, &st, 0) == -1) &&
             errno == EINTR); // ok
      while ((rc = waitpid(pid, &st, 0) == -1) &&
             errno == EINTR) { // Better
          /* nothing */
      }


337 338 339 340
Curly braces
============
Omit the curly braces around an "if", "while", "for" etc. body only when that
body occupies a single line. In every other case we require the braces. This
341 342
ensures that it is trivially easy to identify a single-'statement' loop: each
has only one 'line' in its body.
343 344 345

Omitting braces with a single-line body is fine:

346 347
  while (expr) // one-line body -> omitting curly braces is ok
      single_line_stmt();
348

E
Eric Blake 已提交
349
However, the moment your loop/if/else body extends on to a second line, for
350 351
whatever reason (even if it's just an added comment), then you should add
braces. Otherwise, it would be too easy to insert a statement just before that
352
comment (without adding braces), thinking it is already a multi-statement loop:
353

354 355 356
  while (true) // BAD! multi-line body with no braces
      /* comment... */
      single_line_stmt();
357 358 359

Do this instead:

360 361 362 363
  while (true) { // Always put braces around a multi-line body.
      /* comment... */
      single_line_stmt();
  }
364 365 366 367

There is one exception: when the second body line is not at the same
indentation level as the first body line:

368 369 370
  if (expr)
      die("a diagnostic that would make this line"
          " extend past the 80-column limit"));
371 372 373 374 375 376

It is safe to omit the braces in the code above, since the further-indented
second body line makes it obvious that this is still a single-statement body.

To reiterate, don't do this:

377 378 379 380
  if (expr)            // BAD: no braces around...
      while (expr_2) { // ... a multi-line body
          ...
      }
381 382 383

Do this, instead:

384 385 386 387 388
  if (expr) {
      while (expr_2) {
          ...
      }
  }
389 390 391

However, there is one exception in the other direction, when even a one-line
block should have braces. That occurs when that one-line, brace-less block is
392 393 394 395 396
an "if" or "else" block, and the counterpart block *does* use braces. In that
case, put braces around both blocks. Also, if the "else" block is much shorter
than the "if" block, consider negating the "if"-condition and swapping the
bodies, putting the short block first and making the longer, multi-line block
be the "else" block.
397

398 399 400 401 402
  if (expr) {
      ...
      ...
  }
  else
403 404
      x = y;    // BAD: braceless "else" with braced "then",
                // and short block last
405

406 407 408 409 410 411
  if (expr)
      x = y;    // BAD: braceless "if" with braced "else"
  else {
      ...
      ...
  }
412

413 414 415 416 417 418
Keeping braces consistent and putting the short block first is preferred,
especially when the multi-line body is more than a few lines long, because it
is easier to read and grasp the semantics of an if-then-else block when the
simpler block occurs first, rather than after the more involved block:

  if (!expr) {
419
    x = y; // putting the smaller block first is more readable
420
  } else {
421 422 423
      ...
      ...
  }
424

425
But if negating a complex condition is too ugly, then at least add braces:
426

427
  if (complex expr not worth negating) {
428 429 430 431 432
      ...
      ...
  } else {
      x = y;
  }
433 434


435 436
Preprocessor
============
437 438 439
Macros defined with an ALL_CAPS name should generally be assumed to be unsafe
with regards to arguments with side-effects (that is, MAX(a++, b--) might
increment a or decrement b too many or too few times). Exceptions to this rule
440
are explicitly documented for macros in viralloc.h and virstring.h.
441

442 443
For variadic macros, stick with C99 syntax:

444
  #define vshPrint(_ctl, ...) fprintf(stdout, __VA_ARGS__)
445

446 447
Use parenthesis when checking if a macro is defined, and use indentation to
track nesting:
448

449 450 451
  #if defined(HAVE_POSIX_FALLOCATE) && !defined(HAVE_FALLOCATE)
  # define fallocate(a,ignored,b,c) posix_fallocate(a,b,c)
  #endif
452 453


454 455 456 457 458 459
C types
=======
Use the right type.

Scalars
-------
460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508
- If you're using "int" or "long", odds are good that there's a better type.

- If a variable is counting something, be sure to declare it with an unsigned
type.

- If it's memory-size-related, use "size_t" (use "ssize_t" only if required).

- If it's file-size related, use uintmax_t, or maybe "off_t".

- If it's file-offset related (i.e., signed), use "off_t".

- If it's just counting small numbers use "unsigned int"; (on all but oddball
embedded systems, you can assume that that type is at least four bytes wide).

- If a variable has boolean semantics, give it the "bool" type and use the
corresponding "true" and "false" macros. It's ok to include <stdbool.h>, since
libvirt's use of gnulib ensures that it exists and is usable.

- In the unusual event that you require a specific width, use a standard type
like "int32_t", "uint32_t", "uint64_t", etc.

- While using "bool" is good for readability, it comes with minor caveats:

-- Don't use "bool" in places where the type size must be constant across all
systems, like public interfaces and on-the-wire protocols. Note that it would
be possible (albeit wasteful) to use "bool" in libvirt's logical wire
protocol, since XDR maps that to its lower-level "bool_t" type, which *is*
fixed-size.

-- Don't compare a bool variable against the literal, "true", since a value with
a logical non-false value need not be "1". I.e., don't write "if (seen ==
true) ...". Rather, write "if (seen)...".





Of course, take all of the above with a grain of salt. If you're about to use
some system interface that requires a type like "size_t", "pid_t" or "off_t",
use matching types for any corresponding variables.

Also, if you try to use e.g., "unsigned int" as a type, and that conflicts
with the signedness of a related variable, sometimes it's best just to use the
*wrong* type, if 'pulling the thread' and fixing all related variables would
be too invasive.

Finally, while using descriptive types is important, be careful not to go
overboard. If whatever you're doing causes warnings, or requires casts, then
reconsider or ask for help.
509 510 511

Pointers
--------
512 513 514 515 516 517
Ensure that all of your pointers are 'const-correct'. Unless a pointer is used
to modify the pointed-to storage, give it the "const" attribute. That way, the
reader knows up-front that this is a read-only pointer. Perhaps more
importantly, if we're diligent about this, when you see a non-const pointer,
you're guaranteed that it is used to modify the storage it points to, or it is
aliased to another pointer that is.
518 519


520 521 522
Low level memory management
===========================
Use of the malloc/free/realloc/calloc APIs is deprecated in the libvirt
523 524
codebase, because they encourage a number of serious coding bugs and do not
enable compile time verification of checks for NULL. Instead of these
525
routines, use the macros from viralloc.h.
526

527
- To allocate a single object:
528

529 530
  virDomainPtr domain;

531
  if (VIR_ALLOC(domain) < 0)
532
      return NULL;
533 534 535



536
- To allocate an array of objects:
537

538
  virDomainPtr domains;
539
  size_t ndomains = 10;
540

541
  if (VIR_ALLOC_N(domains, ndomains) < 0)
542
      return NULL;
543 544 545



546
- To allocate an array of object pointers:
547

548
  virDomainPtr *domains;
549
  size_t ndomains = 10;
550

551
  if (VIR_ALLOC_N(domains, ndomains) < 0)
552 553 554 555
      return NULL;



556 557 558 559 560 561
- To re-allocate the array of domains to be 1 element longer (however, note that
repeatedly expanding an array by 1 scales quadratically, so this is
recommended only for smaller arrays):

  virDomainPtr domains;
  size_t ndomains = 0;
562

563
  if (VIR_EXPAND_N(domains, ndomains, 1) < 0)
564
      return NULL;
565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575
  domains[ndomains - 1] = domain;



- To ensure an array has room to hold at least one more element (this approach
scales better, but requires tracking allocation separately from usage)

  virDomainPtr domains;
  size_t ndomains = 0;
  size_t ndomains_max = 0;

576
  if (VIR_RESIZE_N(domains, ndomains_max, ndomains, 1) < 0)
577 578
      return NULL;
  domains[ndomains++] = domain;
579 580 581



582 583
- To trim an array of domains from its allocated size down to the actual used
size:
584

585 586 587 588
  virDomainPtr domains;
  size_t ndomains = x;
  size_t ndomains_max = y;

589
  VIR_SHRINK_N(domains, ndomains_max, ndomains_max - ndomains);
590 591 592



593
- To free an array of domains:
594

595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603
  virDomainPtr domains;
  size_t ndomains = x;
  size_t ndomains_max = y;
  size_t i;

  for (i = 0; i < ndomains; i++)
      VIR_FREE(domains[i]);
  VIR_FREE(domains);
  ndomains_max = ndomains = 0;
604 605 606 607 608 609






610 611
File handling
=============
612 613
Usage of the "fdopen()", "close()", "fclose()" APIs is deprecated in libvirt
code base to help avoiding double-closing of files or file descriptors, which
J
Ján Tomko 已提交
614
is particularly dangerous in a multi-threaded application. Instead of these
E
Eric Blake 已提交
615
APIs, use the macros from virfile.h
616

617
- Open a file from a file descriptor:
618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626

  if ((file = VIR_FDOPEN(fd, "r")) == NULL) {
      virReportSystemError(errno, "%s",
                           _("failed to open file from file descriptor"));
      return -1;
  }
  /* fd is now invalid; only access the file using file variable */


627

628
- Close a file descriptor:
629 630

  if (VIR_CLOSE(fd) < 0) {
631 632 633 634 635
      virReportSystemError(errno, "%s", _("failed to close file"));
  }



636
- Close a file:
637 638 639

  if (VIR_FCLOSE(file) < 0) {
      virReportSystemError(errno, "%s", _("failed to close file"));
640 641 642 643
  }



644 645
- Close a file or file descriptor in an error path, without losing the previous
"errno" value:
646 647

  VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(fd);
648
  VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE(file);
649 650


651 652 653



654 655 656

String comparisons
==================
657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672
Do not use the strcmp, strncmp, etc functions directly. Instead use one of the
following semantically named macros

- For strict equality:

  STREQ(a,b)
  STRNEQ(a,b)



- For case insensitive equality:

  STRCASEEQ(a,b)
  STRCASENEQ(a,b)


673

674
- For strict equality of a substring:
675

676 677
  STREQLEN(a,b,n)
  STRNEQLEN(a,b,n)
678 679 680



681
- For case insensitive equality of a substring:
682

683 684
  STRCASEEQLEN(a,b,n)
  STRCASENEQLEN(a,b,n)
685 686 687



688 689 690 691 692
- For strict equality of a prefix:

  STRPREFIX(a,b)


693

694 695 696 697 698 699 700
- To avoid having to check if a or b are NULL:

  STREQ_NULLABLE(a, b)
  STRNEQ_NULLABLE(a, b)



701 702 703



C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
704 705
String copying
==============
706 707 708
Do not use the strncpy function. According to the man page, it does *not*
guarantee a NULL-terminated buffer, which makes it extremely dangerous to use.
Instead, use one of the functionally equivalent functions:
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
709

710
  virStrncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t n, size_t destbytes)
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
711

712 713 714 715 716 717
The first three arguments have the same meaning as for strncpy; namely the
destination, source, and number of bytes to copy, respectively. The last
argument is the number of bytes available in the destination string; if a copy
of the source string (including a \0) will not fit into the destination, no
bytes are copied and the routine returns NULL. Otherwise, n bytes from the
source are copied into the destination and a trailing \0 is appended.
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
718

719
  virStrcpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t destbytes)
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
720

721 722 723
Use this variant if you know you want to copy the entire src string into dest.
Note that this is a macro, so arguments could be evaluated more than once.
This is equivalent to virStrncpy(dest, src, strlen(src), destbytes)
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
724

725 726 727 728 729 730 731
  virStrcpyStatic(char *dest, const char *src)

Use this variant if you know you want to copy the entire src string into dest
*and* you know that your destination string is a static string (i.e. that
sizeof(dest) returns something meaningful). Note that this is a macro, so
arguments could be evaluated more than once. This is equivalent to
virStrncpy(dest, src, strlen(src), sizeof(dest)).
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
732

733 734 735 736
  VIR_STRDUP(char *dst, const char *src);
  VIR_STRNDUP(char *dst, const char *src, size_t n);

You should avoid using strdup or strndup directly as they do not report
737 738 739 740 741 742
out-of-memory error, and do not allow a NULL source. Use VIR_STRDUP or
VIR_STRNDUP macros instead, which return 0 for NULL source, 1 for successful
copy, and -1 for allocation failure with the error already reported. In very
specific cases, when you don't want to report the out-of-memory error, you can
use VIR_STRDUP_QUIET or VIR_STRNDUP_QUIET, but such usage is very rare and
usually considered a flaw.
743

C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
744

745 746
Variable length string buffer
=============================
747 748 749
If there is a need for complex string concatenations, avoid using the usual
sequence of malloc/strcpy/strcat/snprintf functions and make use of the
virBuffer API described in buf.h
750

751
Typical usage is as follows:
752 753

  char *
754 755
  somefunction(...)
  {
756 757 758 759 760
     virBuffer buf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER;

     ...

     virBufferAddLit(&buf, "<domain>\n");
761
     virBufferAsprintf(&buf, "  <memory>%d</memory>\n", memory);
762 763 764
     ...
     virBufferAddLit(&buf, "</domain>\n");

765
     ...
766 767

     if (virBufferError(&buf)) {
768
         virBufferFreeAndReset(&buf);
769
         virReportOOMError();
770 771 772 773 774
         return NULL;
     }

     return virBufferContentAndReset(&buf);
  }
775 776 777 778


Include files
=============
779 780 781
There are now quite a large number of include files, both libvirt internal and
external, and system includes. To manage all this complexity it's best to
stick to the following general plan for all *.c source files:
782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796

  /*
   * Copyright notice
   * ....
   * ....
   * ....
   *
   */

  #include <config.h>             Must come first in every file.

  #include <stdio.h>              Any system includes you need.
  #include <string.h>
  #include <limits.h>

797
  #if WITH_NUMACTL                Some system includes aren't supported
J
Jim Meyering 已提交
798
  # include <numa.h>              everywhere so need these #if guards.
799 800 801 802 803 804 805
  #endif

  #include "internal.h"           Include this first, after system includes.

  #include "util.h"               Any libvirt internal header files.
  #include "buf.h"

806 807
  static int
  myInternalFunc()                The actual code.
808
  {
809
      ...
810

O
Osier Yang 已提交
811 812 813 814 815 816
Of particular note: *Do not* include libvirt/libvirt.h, libvirt/virterror.h,
libvirt/libvirt-qemu.h, or libvirt/libvirt-lxc.h. They are included by
"internal.h" already and there are some special reasons why you cannot include
these files explicitly. One of the special cases, "libvirt/libvirt.h" is
included prior to "internal.h" in "remote_protocol.x", to avoid exposing
*_LAST enum elements.
817 818


819 820
Printf-style functions
======================
821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831
Whenever you add a new printf-style function, i.e., one with a format string
argument and following "..." in its prototype, be sure to use gcc's printf
attribute directive in the prototype. For example, here's the one for
virAsprintf, in util.h:

  int virAsprintf(char **strp, const char *fmt, ...)
      ATTRIBUTE_FORMAT(printf, 2, 3);

This makes it so gcc's -Wformat and -Wformat-security options can do their
jobs and cross-check format strings with the number and types of arguments.

E
Eric Blake 已提交
832 833 834 835 836 837
When printing to a string, consider using virBuffer for incremental
allocations, virAsprintf for a one-shot allocation, and snprintf for
fixed-width buffers. Do not use sprintf, even if you can prove the buffer
won't overflow, since gnulib does not provide the same portability guarantees
for sprintf as it does for snprintf.

838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846

Use of goto
===========
The use of goto is not forbidden, and goto is widely used throughout libvirt.
While the uncontrolled use of goto will quickly lead to unmaintainable code,
there is a place for it in well structured code where its use increases
readability and maintainability. In general, if goto is used for error
recovery, it's likely to be ok, otherwise, be cautious or avoid it all
together.
847

848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856
The typical use of goto is to jump to cleanup code in the case of a long list
of actions, any of which may fail and cause the entire operation to fail. In
this case, a function will have a single label at the end of the function.
It's almost always ok to use this style. In particular, if the cleanup code
only involves free'ing memory, then having multiple labels is overkill.
VIR_FREE() and every function named XXXFree() in libvirt is required to handle
NULL as its arg. Thus you can safely call free on all the variables even if
they were not yet allocated (yes they have to have been initialized to NULL).
This is much simpler and clearer than having multiple labels.
857

858
There are a couple of signs that a particular use of goto is not ok:
859

860 861 862
- You're using multiple labels. If you find yourself using multiple labels,
you're strongly encouraged to rework your code to eliminate all but one of
them.
863

864 865 866 867 868
- The goto jumps back up to a point above the current line of code being
executed. Please use some combination of looping constructs to re-execute code
instead; it's almost certainly going to be more understandable by others. One
well-known exception to this rule is restarting an i/o operation following
EINTR.
869

870 871 872 873
- The goto jumps down to an arbitrary place in the middle of a function followed
by further potentially failing calls. You should almost certainly be using a
conditional and a block instead of a goto. Perhaps some of your function's
logic would be better pulled out into a helper function.
874 875


876 877 878

Although libvirt does not encourage the Linux kernel wind/unwind style of
multiple labels, there's a good general discussion of the issue archived at
E
Eric Blake 已提交
879
KernelTrap <http://kerneltrap.org/node/553/2131>
880 881 882 883 884 885

When using goto, please use one of these standard labels if it makes sense:

      error: A path only taken upon return with an error code
    cleanup: A path taken upon return with success code + optional error
  no_memory: A path only taken upon return with an OOM error code
886
      retry: If needing to jump upwards (e.g., retry on EINTR)
887 888 889 890 891 892


Libvirt committer guidelines
============================
The AUTHORS files indicates the list of people with commit access right who
can actually merge the patches.
893

J
Jim Meyering 已提交
894
The general rule for committing a patch is to make sure it has been reviewed
895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905
properly in the mailing-list first, usually if a couple of people gave an ACK
or +1 to a patch and nobody raised an objection on the list it should be good
to go. If the patch touches a part of the code where you're not the main
maintainer, or where you do not have a very clear idea of how things work,
it's better to wait for a more authoritative feedback though. Before
committing, please also rebuild locally, run 'make check syntax-check', and
make sure you don't raise errors. Try to look for warnings too; for example,
configure with

  --enable-compile-warnings=error

906 907
which adds -Werror to compile flags, so no warnings get missed

908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921
An exception to 'review and approval on the list first' is fixing failures to
build:

- if a recently committed patch breaks compilation on a platform or for a given
driver, then it's fine to commit a minimal fix directly without getting the
review feedback first

- if make check or make syntax-check breaks, if there is an obvious fix, it's
fine to commit immediately. The patch should still be sent to the list (or
tell what the fix was if trivial), and 'make check syntax-check' should pass
too, before committing anything

- fixes for documentation and code comments can be managed in the same way, but
still make sure they get reviewed if non-trivial.