On 6/23/20 5:20 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
11.05.2020 21:34, Eric Blake wrote:
On 5/11/20 12:17 PM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Thu 30 Apr 2020 01:10:21 PM CEST, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
compute 'int tail' via % 'int alignment' - safe
tail = (offset + bytes) %
11.05.2020 21:34, Eric Blake wrote:
On 5/11/20 12:17 PM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Thu 30 Apr 2020 01:10:21 PM CEST, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
compute 'int tail' via % 'int alignment' - safe
tail = (offset + bytes) % alignment;
both are int64_t, no chance of overflow
On Thu 30 Apr 2020 01:10:21 PM CEST, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> compute 'int tail' via % 'int alignment' - safe
tail = (offset + bytes) % alignment;
both are int64_t, no chance of overflow here?
Berto
--
sheepdog mailing list
sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org
On 4/30/20 6:10 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
We are generally moving to int64_t for both offset and bytes parameters
on all io paths.
Main motivation is realization of 64-bit write_zeroes operation for
fast zeroing large disk chunks, up to the whole disk.
We chose signed type, to be
