Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] bitmap: reject zero-size bitmap

2010-06-02 Thread Eric Blake
On 06/02/2010 01:26 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Eric Blake wrote: >> * src/util/bitmap.c (virBitmapAlloc): Tighten sanity check. >> --- >>> Yes, you are right - especially since there is no grow operation >>> :-). I should have returned NULL for size 0 request in the original >>> version. >>> >>

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] bitmap: reject zero-size bitmap

2010-06-02 Thread Jim Fehlig
Eric Blake wrote: * src/util/bitmap.c (virBitmapAlloc): Tighten sanity check. --- For that matter, should virBitmapAlloc(0) return NULL, instead of it's current behavior of allocating an (empty) bitmap? Yes, you are right - especially since there is no grow operation :-). I shoul

[libvirt] [PATCH] bitmap: reject zero-size bitmap

2010-06-02 Thread Eric Blake
* src/util/bitmap.c (virBitmapAlloc): Tighten sanity check. --- > > For that matter, should virBitmapAlloc(0) return NULL, instead of it's > > current behavior of allocating an (empty) bitmap? > > > > Yes, you are right - especially since there is no grow operation > :-). I should have return