Am 21.11.2012 23:32, schrieb Peter Maydell:
On 21 November 2012 17:03, Stefan Weil s...@weilnetz.de wrote:
Why do you use int64_t instead of off_t?
If the value is related to file sizes, off_t would be a good choice.
Looking at the librbd API (which is what the size and ret
values come from),
On 22 November 2012 08:23, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
s.pri...@profihost.ag wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 23:32, schrieb Peter Maydell:
Looking at the librbd API (which is what the size and ret
values come from), it uses size_t and ssize_t for these.
So I think probably ssize_t is the right type for
On 21 November 2012 17:03, Stefan Weil s...@weilnetz.de wrote:
Why do you use int64_t instead of off_t?
If the value is related to file sizes, off_t would be a good choice.
Looking at the librbd API (which is what the size and ret
values come from), it uses size_t and ssize_t for these.
So I
Hello,
i send a new patch using ssize_t. (Subject [PATCH] overflow of int ret:
use ssize_t for ret)
Stefan
Am 22.11.2012 09:40, schrieb Peter Maydell:
On 22 November 2012 08:23, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
s.pri...@profihost.ag wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 23:32, schrieb Peter Maydell:
Looking
Am 21.11.2012 21:53, schrieb Stefan Priebe -
Profihost AG:
Not sure about off_t. What is min and max size? Stefan
off_t is a signed value which is used in function lseek to
address any byte of a seekable file.
The range is typically 64 bit
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:47:16AM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 07:41, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag wrote:
Hi Stefan,
Am 20.11.2012 17:29, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at
Am 21.11.2012 09:26, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:47:16AM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 07:41, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
We're going in circles here. I know the types are wrong in the code and
your patch fixes it, that's why I said it looks
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 09:33:08AM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 09:26, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:47:16AM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Am 21.11.2012 07:41, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
QEMU is currently in hard freeze and only
Am 20.11.2012 13:44, schrieb Stefan Priebe:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length of writes
or discarded blocks. These values might be bigger than int.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag
---
block/rbd.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Not sure about off_t. What is min and max size?
Stefan
Am 21.11.2012 um 18:03 schrieb Stefan Weil s...@weilnetz.de:
Am 20.11.2012 13:44, schrieb Stefan Priebe:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length of writes
or discarded blocks. These values might be bigger than int.
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:44:55PM +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length of writes
or discarded blocks. These values might be bigger than int.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag
---
block/rbd.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2
Hi Stefan,
Am 20.11.2012 17:29, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:44:55PM +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length of writes
or discarded blocks. These values might be bigger than int.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag
---
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag wrote:
Hi Stefan,
Am 20.11.2012 17:29, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:44:55PM +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length of writes
or discarded blocks. These values
Am 21.11.2012 07:41, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Stefan Priebe s.pri...@profihost.ag wrote:
Hi Stefan,
Am 20.11.2012 17:29, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:44:55PM +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote:
rbd / rados tends to return pretty often length
14 matches
Mail list logo
