Fabiano Rosas <faro...@suse.de> writes:
> Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> qemu_rdma_exchange_get_response() compares int parameter @expecting
>> with uint32_t head->type. Actual arguments are non-negative
>> enumeration constants, RDMAControlHeader uint32_t member type, or
>> qemu_rdma_exchange_recv() int parameter expecting. Actual arguments
>> for the latter are non-negative enumeration constants. Change both
>> parameters to uint32_t.
>>
>> In qio_channel_rdma_readv(), loop control variable @i is ssize_t, and
>> counts from 0 up to @niov, which is size_t. Change @i to size_t.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Fabiano Rosas <faro...@suse.de>
>
> just a comment...
>
>> static int qemu_rdma_exchange_recv(RDMAContext *rdma, RDMAControlHeader
>> *head,
>> - int expecting)
>> + uint32_t expecting)
>> {
>> RDMAControlHeader ready = {
>> .len = 0,
>> @@ -2851,7 +2851,7 @@ static ssize_t qio_channel_rdma_readv(QIOChannel *ioc,
>> RDMAContext *rdma;
>> RDMAControlHeader head;
>> int ret = 0;
>> - ssize_t i;
>> + size_t i;
>> size_t done = 0;
>
> It seems the idea was for 'done' to be ssize_t like in
> qio_channel_rdma_writev()
You're right, the two functions are still inconsistent: @done is size_t
here and ssize_t there.
Hmm, there's yet another mess:
ret = qemu_rdma_fill(rdma, data, want, 0);
done += ret;
want -= ret;
qemu_rdma_fill() returns size_t, @done is size_t or ssize_t, @want is
@size_t, but @ret is int. Unwanted truncation is theoretically
possible.
Separate patch.
Thanks!
