On 12/18/18 9:11 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > 15.12.2018 16:53, Eric Blake wrote: >> Our copy-and-pasted open-coding of strtol handling forgot to >> handle overflow conditions. Use qemu_strto*() instead. >> >> In the case of --partition, since we insist on a user-supplied >> partition to be non-zero, we can use 0 rather than -1 for our >> initial value to distinguish when a partition is not being >> served, for slightly more optimal code. >> >> The error messages for out-of-bounds values are less specific, >> but should not be a terrible loss in quality. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> >> >> --- >> v2: Retitle, catch more uses of strtol >> [Hmm - this depends on int64_t and off_t being compatible; if they >> aren't that way on all platforms, I'll need a temporary variable] > > hmm, as I understand, even if this compatibility exists, it's not a part > of standard and nothing about off_t size in POSIX..
off_t allows you to run on older systems with 32-bit offsets and newer systems with 64-bit offsets; but these days, even on 32-bit systems, we compile qemu to always ask for 64-bit off_t. Using off_t instead of int64_t is probably a separate cleanup, but one that may be worth making prior to this patch, so I'll defer this one to my v3. > > Moreover: what is the reason for using off_t in NBD code? We don't have it > in NBD protocol, we don't have it in generic block layer interface. Isn't it > always casted to int64_t or like this? > -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
