Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 08:28:31AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 2/5/21 5:10 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:07:08PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > >> The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we > >> happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Eric Blake
On 2/5/21 5:10 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:07:08PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >> The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we >> happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is >> intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Eric Blake
On 2/5/21 4:34 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:07:08PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >> The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we >> happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is >> intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:07:08PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we > happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is > intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a fraction that is > not a clean translation to

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
04.02.2021 22:07, Eric Blake wrote: The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a fraction that is not a clean translation to binary, truncating/rounding behind

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-05 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:07:08PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we > happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is > intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a fraction that is > not a clean translation to

Re: [PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-04 Thread Eric Blake
On 2/4/21 1:07 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we > happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is > intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a fraction that is > not a clean translation to binary, truncating/rounding

[PATCH 3/3] utils: Deprecate inexact fractional suffix sizes

2021-02-04 Thread Eric Blake
The value '1.1k' is inexact; 1126.4 bytes is not possible, so we happen to truncate it to 1126. Our use of fractional sizes is intended for convenience, but when a user specifies a fraction that is not a clean translation to binary, truncating/rounding behind their backs can cause confusion.