On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 12.07.2012 22:28, schrieb Blue Swirl:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
> +pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_fo
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 July 2012 21:28, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
>>> Which is why such changes are probably a bad idea. Even more so if they
>>> aren't scripted
Am 12.07.2012 22:28, schrieb Blue Swirl:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
>>> blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
>>>
+pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format),
+backing_fmt ? backing_file : "");
On 12 July 2012 21:28, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
>> Which is why such changes are probably a bad idea. Even more so if they
>> aren't scripted.
>
> Maybe your patches are perfect from day one, but all pa
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 1:12 PM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen)
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 02:09:53PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 11 July 2012 13:54, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> > Does this patch improve anything? Last time I checked, qemu only
>> > compiled on gcc anyway.
>>
>> It would be nice to be a
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
>> blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
>>
>>> +pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format),
>>> +backing_fmt ? backing_file : "");
>>
>> s/backing_file/backing_fmt/
>
> Which is w
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 02:09:53PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 11 July 2012 13:54, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Does this patch improve anything? Last time I checked, qemu only
> > compiled on gcc anyway.
>
> It would be nice to be able to compile with LLVM/Clang; however
> since Clang supports the
On 11 July 2012 13:54, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Does this patch improve anything? Last time I checked, qemu only
> compiled on gcc anyway.
It would be nice to be able to compile with LLVM/Clang; however
since Clang supports the ?: gcc extension this patch doesn't
move us any further in that direction.
Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
> blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> +pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format),
>> +backing_fmt ? backing_file : "");
>
> s/backing_file/backing_fmt/
Which is why such changes are probably a bad idea. Even more so if they
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> From: Blue Swirl
>>
>> Replace expr1 ?: expr2 with expr1 ? expr1 : expr2 as K&R intended.
>>
>> If expr1 has side effects, introduce a temporary variable.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl
>> ---
>> block
blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
> From: Blue Swirl
>
> Replace expr1 ?: expr2 with expr1 ? expr1 : expr2 as K&R intended.
>
> If expr1 has side effects, introduce a temporary variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl
> ---
> block.c |6 --
> block/qcow2.c|6 --
>
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> +pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format),
>> +backing_fmt ? backing_file : "");
>
> s/backing_file/backing_fmt/
Thanks, will fix.
I accidentally sent the patches using wrong
blauwir...@gmail.com writes:
> +pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format),
> +backing_fmt ? backing_file : "");
s/backing_file/backing_fmt/
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"A
From: Blue Swirl
Replace expr1 ?: expr2 with expr1 ? expr1 : expr2 as K&R intended.
If expr1 has side effects, introduce a temporary variable.
Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl
---
block.c |6 --
block/qcow2.c|6 --
bt-vhci.c|2 +-
hw/bt-hci.c
14 matches
Mail list logo
