Re: [PATCH 5/6] parse-options: add precision handling for OPTION_BITOP

From

René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>

Date

Jul 1, 2025, 15:21 UTC

Message-ID

<978e38e1-45b4-4c74-856d-255a87d6c817@web.de>

In-Reply-To

<aGO-kbdAgMMef-A5@pks.im>

On 7/1/25 12:55 PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 01:51:19PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
>> Similar to 09705696f7 (parse-options: introduce precision handling for
>> `OPTION_INTEGER`, 2025-04-17) support value variables of different sizes
>> for OPTION_BITOP.  Do that by requiring their "precision" to be set,
>> casting their "value" pointer accordingly and checking whether the value
>> fits.
>>
>> Checking "defval" has the side-effect of also requiring PARSE_OPT_NOARG.
> 
> Hm, requiring PARSE_OPT_NOARG for what? I cannot see it being touched in
> this patch at all, so I'm a but puzzled.

diff --git a/parse-options.c b/parse-options.c
index 6bd7158806..0dc9b0324a 100644
--- a/parse-options.c
+++ b/parse-options.c
@@ -620,18 +623,19 @@ static void parse_options_check(const struct option *opts)
 			optbug(opts, "uses feature "
 			       "not supported for dashless options");
 		if (opts->type == OPTION_SET_INT && !opts->defval &&
 		    opts->long_name && !(opts->flags & PARSE_OPT_NONEG))
 			optbug(opts, "OPTION_SET_INT 0 should not be negatable");
 		switch (opts->type) {
 		case OPTION_SET_INT:
 		case OPTION_BIT:
 		case OPTION_NEGBIT:
+		case OPTION_BITOP:
 			if (!signed_int_fits(opts->defval, opts->precision))
 				optbug(opts, "has invalid defval");
 			/* fallthru */
 		case OPTION_COUNTUP:
 		case OPTION_NUMBER:
 			if ((opts->flags & PARSE_OPT_OPTARG) ||
 			    !(opts->flags & PARSE_OPT_NOARG))
 				optbug(opts, "should not accept an argument");
 			break;