From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 763D99121F
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  3 Apr 2024 13:01:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 43E9816568
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  3 Apr 2024 13:01:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  3 Apr 2024 13:01:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 550D9446CF
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  3 Apr 2024 13:01:12 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <e3a0b633-e851-46f5-b76f-661a7948fc87@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:01:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20240328123707.336951-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20240328123707.336951-7-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1712136715.t3s03j6zyy.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1712136715.t3s03j6zyy.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.029 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH v3 pxar 06/58] encoder: move to stack based
 state tracking
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 11:01:43 -0000

On 4/3/24 11:54, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> 
> should we still have some sort of checks here? e.g., when dropping an
> encoder, how should self.finished and self.state look like? IIUC, then a
> dropped encoder should have an empty state and be finished (i.e.,
> `close()` has been called on it).
> 
> or is this simply not relevant anymore because we only create one and
> then drop it at the end (but should we then have a similar mechanism for
> EncoderState?)

The encoder should now be consumed with the `close` call, which takes 
ownership of the encoder and drops it afterwards, so all the state 
checks should happen there.

Previously, the encoder finish consumed the per-directory level encoder 
object, passing possible errors up to the parent implementation, which 
is not possible now since there is only one encoder instance. I did not 
want to panic here as the checks should be done in the close now, so the 
Drop implementation was removed.

Not sure what to check in a Drop implementation the EncoderState. What 
did you have in mind for that? Note that errors get propagated to the 
parent state in the encoder finish calls now.

>> +    fn output_state(&mut self) -> io::Result<(&mut T, &mut EncoderState)> {
>> +        Ok((
>> +            self.output.as_mut(),
>> +            self.state
>> +                .last_mut()
>> +                .ok_or_else(|| io_format_err!("encoder state stack underflow"))?,
>> +        ))
>> +    }
>> +
> 
> we could have another helper here that also returns the Option<&mut T>
> for payload_output (while not used as often, it might still be a good
> idea for readability):

Okay, yes I can add that.