Re: [Libguestfs] [libnbd PATCH v2 4/6] block_status: Fix assertion with large server size

2023-09-22 Thread Laszlo Ersek
On 9/21/23 22:58, Eric Blake wrote: > As mentioned in the previous commit ("api: Sanitize sizes larger than > INT64_MAX"), the NBD spec does not (yet) prohibit a server from > advertising a size larger than INT64_MAX. While we can't report such > size to the user, v1.16 was at least internally

Re: [Libguestfs] [libnbd PATCH v2 4/6] block_status: Fix assertion with large server size

2023-09-21 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 03:58:03PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > As mentioned in the previous commit ("api: Sanitize sizes larger than > INT64_MAX"), the NBD spec does not (yet) prohibit a server from > advertising a size larger than INT64_MAX. While we can't report such > size to the user, v1.16

[Libguestfs] [libnbd PATCH v2 4/6] block_status: Fix assertion with large server size

2023-09-21 Thread Eric Blake
As mentioned in the previous commit ("api: Sanitize sizes larger than INT64_MAX"), the NBD spec does not (yet) prohibit a server from advertising a size larger than INT64_MAX. While we can't report such size to the user, v1.16 was at least internally consistent with the server's size everywhere