On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 03:09:42PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Thu, 2023-11-02 at 12:27 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 12:20:29PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote: > > > By now, all "struct expr_ops" have a json() hook set. Thus, drop > > > handling the possibility that they might not. From now on, it's a > > > bug > > > to create a ops without the hook. > > > > > > It's not clear what the code tried to do. It bothered to implement > > > a > > > fallback via fmemopen(), but apparently that fallback is no > > > considered a > > > good solution as it also printed a "warning". Either the fallback > > > is > > > good and does not warrant a warning. Or the condition is to be > > > avoided > > > to begin with, which we should do by testing the expr_ops > > > structures. > > > > > > As the fallback path has an overhead to create the memory stream, > > > the > > > fallback path is indeed not great. That is the reason to outlaw a > > > missing json() hook, to require that all hooks are present, and to > > > drop > > > the fallback path. > > > > > > A missing hook is very easy to cover with unit tests. Such a test > > > shall > > > be added soon. > > > > That's fine to simplify code. > > > > But then, in 1/2 you better set some STUB that hits BUG() because we > > should not ever see variable and symbol expression from json listing > > path ever. > > > > I think BUG() would not work. This does happen, as the tests in patches > > Subject: [PATCH nft 0/7] add and check dump files for JSON in tests/shell > Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 19:53:26 +0100 > > expose. No listing from the kernel would use the variable expression. What example would be triggering bug?
