HACKING 33.8 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

17 18
(2) Official upstream repository is kept in git ("git://libvirt.org/libvirt.git")
and is browsable along with other libvirt-related repositories (e.g.
19
libvirt-python) online <http://libvirt.org/git/>.
20 21

(3) Post patches in unified diff format, with git rename detection enabled. You
E
Eric Blake 已提交
22 23 24 25 26
need a one-time setup of:

  git config diff.renames true

After that, a command similar to this should work:
27 28 29 30 31

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

or:

32
  git diff > libvirt-myfeature.patch
33

E
Eric Blake 已提交
34 35 36
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:
37 38 39 40 41 42

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

E
Eric Blake 已提交
43 44
More hints on compiling can be found here <compiling.html>. When you want to
post your patches:
45 46 47

  git pull --rebase
  (fix any conflicts)
48 49
  git send-email --cover-letter --no-chain-reply-to --annotate \
                 --to=libvir-list@redhat.com master
50

51
(Note that the "git send-email" subcommand may not be in the main git package
C
Chen Hanxiao 已提交
52
and using it may require installation of a separate package, for example the
53 54 55 56
"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:
57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

  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).



73
(4) In your commit message, make the summary line reasonably short (60 characters
E
Eric Blake 已提交
74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84
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.



85
(5) Split large changes into a series of smaller patches, self-contained if
86
possible, with an explanation of each patch and an explanation of how the
87
sequence of patches fits together. Moreover, please keep in mind that it's
88 89 90 91 92
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).
93 94


95

96
(6) Make sure your patches apply against libvirt GIT. Developers only follow GIT
97
and don't care much about released versions.
98

99
(7) Run the automated tests on your code before submitting any changes. In
100 101
particular, configure with compile warnings set to -Werror. This is done
automatically for a git checkout; from a tarball, use:
102

103
  ./configure --enable-werror
104 105 106 107 108 109 110

and run the tests:

  make check
  make syntax-check
  make -C tests valgrind

E
Eric Blake 已提交
111 112
Valgrind <http://valgrind.org/> is a test that checks for memory management
issues, such as leaks or use of uninitialized variables.
113

114 115
Some tests are skipped by default in a development environment, based on the
time they take in comparison to the likelihood that those tests will turn up
116
problems during incremental builds. These tests default to being run when
117 118 119 120 121 122
building from a tarball or with the configure option --enable-expensive-tests;
you can also force a one-time toggle of these tests by setting
VIR_TEST_EXPENSIVE to 0 or 1 at make time, as in:

  make check VIR_TEST_EXPENSIVE=1

123 124 125 126 127 128 129
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

E
Eric Blake 已提交
130 131 132 133 134
When debugging failures during development, it is possible to focus in on just
the failing subtests by using TESTS and VIR_TEST_RANGE:

  make check VIR_TEST_DEBUG=1 VIR_TEST_RANGE=3-5 TESTS=qemuxml2argvtest

135
Also, individual tests can be run from inside the "tests/" directory, like:
136 137 138

  ./qemuxml2xmltest

E
Eric Blake 已提交
139 140
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
141 142 143 144
various tests under gdb or Valgrind.



145
(8) The Valgrind test should produce similar output to "make check". If the output
146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200
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)


201
In this instance, it is acceptable to modify the "tests/.valgrind.supp" file
202 203 204
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
205 206
the Valgrind home page <http://valgrind.org/>. The following trace was added
to "tests/.valgrind.supp" in order to suppress the warning:
207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218

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

219 220


221
(9) Update tests and/or documentation, particularly if you are adding a new
222
feature or changing the output of a program.
223 224


225

226
There is more on this subject, including lots of links to background reading
E
Eric Blake 已提交
227
on the subject, on Richard Jones' guide to working with open source projects
228
<http://people.redhat.com/rjones/how-to-supply-code-to-open-source-projects/>.
229

230

231 232 233
Code indentation
================
Libvirt's C source code generally adheres to some basic code-formatting
234 235 236 237
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.
238

J
Ján Tomko 已提交
239 240 241
If you use Emacs, the project includes a file .dir-locals.el that sets up the
preferred indentation. If you use vim, append the following to your ~/.vimrc
file:
242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250

  set nocompatible
  filetype on
  set autoindent
  set smartindent
  set cindent
  set tabstop=8
  set shiftwidth=4
  set expandtab
J
Ján Tomko 已提交
251
  set cinoptions=(0,:0,l1,t0,L3
252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262
  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.

263 264 265

Code formatting (especially for new code)
=========================================
266 267 268
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:
269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276

  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 "$@"
  }

277 278 279
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.
280

281 282 283 284 285 286
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.

287

288 289 290
Bracket spacing
===============
The keywords "if", "for", "while", and "switch" must have a single space
M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
291
following them before the opening bracket. E.g.
292 293 294 295

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

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

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

M
Martin Kletzander 已提交
301
Function calls mustnothave any whitespace between the function name and the opening bracket. E.g.
302 303 304 305 306

      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
307
opening bracket of the arg list. E.g.
308 309 310 311 312

      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
313
immediately prior to any closing bracket. E.g.
314 315 316 317 318

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


E
Eric Blake 已提交
319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347
Commas
======
Commas should always be followed by a space or end of line, and never have
leading space; this is enforced during 'make syntax-check'.

      call(a,b ,c);// Bad
      call(a, b, c); // Good

When declaring an enum or using a struct initializer that occupies more than
one line, use a trailing comma. That way, future edits to extend the list only
have to add a line, rather than modify an existing line to add the
intermediate comma. Any sentinel enumerator value with a name ending in _LAST
is exempt, since you would extend such an enum before the _LAST element.
Another reason to favor trailing commas is that it requires less effort to
produce via code generators. Note that the syntax checker is unable to enforce
a style of trailing commas, so there are counterexamples in existing code
which do not use it; also, while C99 allows trailing commas, remember that
JSON and XDR do not.

      enum {
          VALUE_ONE,
          VALUE_TWO // Bad
      };
      enum {
          VALUE_THREE,
          VALUE_FOUR, // Good
      };


348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370
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 */
      }


371 372
Curly braces
============
373 374 375 376
Omit the curly braces around an "if", "while", "for" etc. body only when both
that body and the condition itself occupy a single line. In every other case
we require the braces. This ensures that it is trivially easy to identify a
single-'statement' loop: each has only one 'line' in its body.
377

378 379 380 381 382 383
  while (expr)             // single line body; {} is forbidden
      single_line_stmt();

  while (expr(arg1,
              arg2))      // indentation makes it obvious it is single line,
      single_line_stmt(); // {} is optional (not enforced either way)
384

385 386
  while (expr1 &&
         expr2)           // multi-line, at same indentation, {} required
387
      single_line_stmt();
388

E
Eric Blake 已提交
389
However, the moment your loop/if/else body extends on to a second line, for
390 391
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
392
comment (without adding braces), thinking it is already a multi-statement loop:
393

394 395 396
  while (true) // BAD! multi-line body with no braces
      /* comment... */
      single_line_stmt();
397 398 399

Do this instead:

400 401 402 403
  while (true) { // Always put braces around a multi-line body.
      /* comment... */
      single_line_stmt();
  }
404 405 406 407

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

408 409 410
  if (expr)
      die("a diagnostic that would make this line"
          " extend past the 80-column limit"));
411 412 413 414 415 416

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:

417 418 419 420
  if (expr)            // BAD: no braces around...
      while (expr_2) { // ... a multi-line body
          ...
      }
421 422 423

Do this, instead:

424 425 426 427 428
  if (expr) {
      while (expr_2) {
          ...
      }
  }
429 430 431

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
432 433 434 435 436
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.
437

438 439 440 441 442
  if (expr) {
      ...
      ...
  }
  else
443 444
      x = y;    // BAD: braceless "else" with braced "then",
                // and short block last
445

446 447 448 449 450 451
  if (expr)
      x = y;    // BAD: braceless "if" with braced "else"
  else {
      ...
      ...
  }
452

453 454 455 456 457 458
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) {
459
    x = y; // putting the smaller block first is more readable
460
  } else {
461 462 463
      ...
      ...
  }
464

465
But if negating a complex condition is too ugly, then at least add braces:
466

467
  if (complex expr not worth negating) {
468 469 470 471 472
      ...
      ...
  } else {
      x = y;
  }
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
Use hanging braces for compound statements: the opening brace of a compound
statement should be on the same line as the condition being tested. Only
top-level function bodies, nested scopes, and compound structure declarations
should ever have { on a line by itself.

  void
  foo(int a, int b)
  {                          // correct - function body
      int 2d[][] = {
        {                    // correct - complex initialization
          1, 2,
        },
      };
      if (a)
      {                      // BAD: compound brace on its own line
          do_stuff();
      }
      {                      // correct - nested scope
          int tmp;
          if (a < b) {       // correct - hanging brace
              tmp = b;
              b = a;
              a = tmp;
          }
      }
  }

501

502 503
Preprocessor
============
504 505 506
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
507
are explicitly documented for macros in viralloc.h and virstring.h.
508

509 510
For variadic macros, stick with C99 syntax:

511
  #define vshPrint(_ctl, ...) fprintf(stdout, __VA_ARGS__)
512

513 514
Use parenthesis when checking if a macro is defined, and use indentation to
track nesting:
515

516
  #if defined(HAVE_POSIX_FALLOCATE) && !defined(HAVE_FALLOCATE)
M
Michal Privoznik 已提交
517
  # define fallocate(a, ignored, b, c) posix_fallocate(a, b, c)
518
  #endif
519 520


521 522 523 524 525 526
C types
=======
Use the right type.

Scalars
-------
527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575
- 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.
576 577 578

Pointers
--------
579 580 581 582 583 584
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.
585 586


587 588 589
Low level memory management
===========================
Use of the malloc/free/realloc/calloc APIs is deprecated in the libvirt
590 591
codebase, because they encourage a number of serious coding bugs and do not
enable compile time verification of checks for NULL. Instead of these
592
routines, use the macros from viralloc.h.
593

594
- To allocate a single object:
595

596 597
  virDomainPtr domain;

598
  if (VIR_ALLOC(domain) < 0)
599
      return NULL;
600 601 602



603
- To allocate an array of objects:
604

605
  virDomainPtr domains;
606
  size_t ndomains = 10;
607

608
  if (VIR_ALLOC_N(domains, ndomains) < 0)
609
      return NULL;
610 611 612



613
- To allocate an array of object pointers:
614

615
  virDomainPtr *domains;
616
  size_t ndomains = 10;
617

618
  if (VIR_ALLOC_N(domains, ndomains) < 0)
619 620 621 622
      return NULL;



623 624 625 626 627 628
- 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;
629

630
  if (VIR_EXPAND_N(domains, ndomains, 1) < 0)
631
      return NULL;
632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642
  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;

643
  if (VIR_RESIZE_N(domains, ndomains_max, ndomains, 1) < 0)
644 645
      return NULL;
  domains[ndomains++] = domain;
646 647 648



649 650
- To trim an array of domains from its allocated size down to the actual used
size:
651

652 653 654 655
  virDomainPtr domains;
  size_t ndomains = x;
  size_t ndomains_max = y;

656
  VIR_SHRINK_N(domains, ndomains_max, ndomains_max - ndomains);
657 658 659



660
- To free an array of domains:
661

662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670
  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;
671 672 673 674 675 676






677 678
File handling
=============
679 680
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
681
is particularly dangerous in a multi-threaded application. Instead of these
E
Eric Blake 已提交
682
APIs, use the macros from virfile.h
683

684
- Open a file from a file descriptor:
685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693

  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 */


694

695
- Close a file descriptor:
696 697

  if (VIR_CLOSE(fd) < 0) {
698 699 700 701 702
      virReportSystemError(errno, "%s", _("failed to close file"));
  }



703
- Close a file:
704 705 706

  if (VIR_FCLOSE(file) < 0) {
      virReportSystemError(errno, "%s", _("failed to close file"));
707 708 709 710
  }



711 712
- Close a file or file descriptor in an error path, without losing the previous
"errno" value:
713 714

  VIR_FORCE_CLOSE(fd);
715
  VIR_FORCE_FCLOSE(file);
716 717


718 719 720



721 722 723

String comparisons
==================
724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739
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)


740

741
- For strict equality of a substring:
742

743 744
  STREQLEN(a,b,n)
  STRNEQLEN(a,b,n)
745 746 747



748
- For case insensitive equality of a substring:
749

750 751
  STRCASEEQLEN(a,b,n)
  STRCASENEQLEN(a,b,n)
752 753 754



755 756 757 758 759
- For strict equality of a prefix:

  STRPREFIX(a,b)


760

761 762 763 764 765 766 767
- To avoid having to check if a or b are NULL:

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



768 769 770



C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
771 772
String copying
==============
773 774 775
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
776

777
  virStrncpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t n, size_t destbytes)
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
778

779 780 781 782 783 784
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
785

786
  virStrcpy(char *dest, const char *src, size_t destbytes)
C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
787

788 789 790
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
791

792 793 794 795 796 797 798
  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
799

800 801 802 803
  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
804 805 806 807 808 809
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.
810

C
Chris Lalancette 已提交
811

812 813
Variable length string buffer
=============================
814 815
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
J
Ján Tomko 已提交
816
virBuffer API described in virbuffer.h
817

818
Typical usage is as follows:
819 820

  char *
821 822
  somefunction(...)
  {
823 824 825 826 827
     virBuffer buf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER;

     ...

     virBufferAddLit(&buf, "<domain>\n");
828
     virBufferAsprintf(&buf, "  <memory>%d</memory>\n", memory);
829 830 831
     ...
     virBufferAddLit(&buf, "</domain>\n");

832
     ...
833

J
Ján Tomko 已提交
834
     if (virBufferCheckError(&buf) < 0)
835 836 837 838
         return NULL;

     return virBufferContentAndReset(&buf);
  }
839 840 841 842


Include files
=============
843 844 845
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:
846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860

  /*
   * 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>

861
  #if WITH_NUMACTL                Some system includes aren't supported
J
Jim Meyering 已提交
862
  # include <numa.h>              everywhere so need these #if guards.
863 864 865 866 867 868 869
  #endif

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

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

870 871
  static int
  myInternalFunc()                The actual code.
872
  {
873
      ...
874

O
Osier Yang 已提交
875 876 877 878 879 880
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.
881 882


883 884
Printf-style functions
======================
885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895
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
896 897 898 899 900 901
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.

902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910

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.
911

912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920
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.
921

922
There are a couple of signs that a particular use of goto is not ok:
923

924 925 926
- 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.
927

928 929 930 931 932
- 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.
933

934 935 936 937
- 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.
938 939


940 941 942

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
943
KernelTrap <http://kerneltrap.org/node/553/2131>
944 945 946 947 948 949

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
950
      retry: If needing to jump upwards (e.g., retry on EINTR)
951

J
Ján Tomko 已提交
952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961
Top-level labels should be indented by one space (putting them on the
beginning of the line confuses function context detection in git):

int foo()
{
    /* ... do stuff ... */
 cleanup:
    /* ... do other stuff ... */
}

962 963 964 965 966

Libvirt committer guidelines
============================
The AUTHORS files indicates the list of people with commit access right who
can actually merge the patches.
967

J
Jim Meyering 已提交
968
The general rule for committing a patch is to make sure it has been reviewed
969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979
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

980 981
which adds -Werror to compile flags, so no warnings get missed

982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995
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.