qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 01/23] block: Allow NULL file for bdrv_get_bl


From: John Snow
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 01/23] block: Allow NULL file for bdrv_get_block_status()
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:42:31 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0


On 10/11/2017 04:42 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 10.10.2017 um 21:24 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/2017 03:00 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2017 09:43 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v5: use second label for cleaner exit logic [John], use local_pnum
>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -1811,16 +1811,19 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn 
>>>>>> bdrv_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
>>>>>>      int64_t total_sectors;
>>>>>>      int64_t n;
>>>>>>      int64_t ret, ret2;
>>>>>> +    BlockDriverState *local_file = NULL;
>>>>>> +    int local_pnum = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't quite see what the point of local_pnum is if we assert anyway
>>>>> that the real pnum is non-NULL.
>>>>
>>>> I did it in parallel with fallout from John's review on v4:
>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-09/msg06958.html
>>>>
>>>> but since it wasn't specifically asked for, and is now getting
>>>> questions, I'm fine with not having it in v6.
>>>
>>> Okay, I re-read v4, and here's the comment (on 21/23) that led to my
>>> experiment in v5 patch 1 with local_pnum:
>>>
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-10/msg00293.html
>>>
>>> and I did argue:
>>>
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-10/msg00311.html
>>
>> Well, Kevin's the boss :D
> 
> I'm not sure how renaming *pnum into local_pnum addresses your concerns?
> We still update local_pnum before we undo our alignment corrections. Or
> are you talking about some other part of these mails?
> 
> Kevin
> 

I made only a stylistic comment and it looked to me at a glance like it
had resulted in conflicting feedback from you (since I all but asked for
a local pnum) -- but my feedback was only minor stylistic stuff, so I'm
deferring to you.

--js



reply via email to

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