[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH v3 17/39] qcow2: Update l2_allocate() to support

From: Alberto Garcia
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH v3 17/39] qcow2: Update l2_allocate() to support L2 slices
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2018 10:41:09 +0100
User-agent: Notmuch/0.18.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1 (i586-pc-linux-gnu)

On Thu 01 Feb 2018 07:15:23 PM CET, Max Reitz <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> -static int l2_allocate(BlockDriverState *bs, int l1_index, uint64_t 
>>>> **table)
>>>> +static int l2_allocate(BlockDriverState *bs, int l1_index)
>>>>  {
>>>>      BDRVQcow2State *s = bs->opaque;
>>>>      uint64_t old_l2_offset;
>>>> -    uint64_t *l2_table = NULL;
>>>> +    uint64_t *l2_slice = NULL;
>>>> +    unsigned slice, slice_size2, n_slices;
>>> I'd personally prefer size_t, but oh well.
>> I don't see any reason not to use int / unsigned. The size of a slice
>> is always <= cluster_size (an int), and both slice and n_slices are
>> smaller than that.
> Well, what's the reason to use unsigned? :-)
> The type of the expression used to set slice_size2 simply is size_t.

I tend to choose the type of a variable based on what it's going to
hold, and use int (signed or not) whenever possible.

In this case a normal integer can certainly hold all possible values of
slice_size2. And unsigned because it's never going to be negative. It
could also be signed, it's not going to be any different in practice,
it's just more explicit.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]