From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49155)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1a1DEa-00081e-1X
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:02:16 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1a1DEV-0005f5-BS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:02:11 -0500
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 21:01:51 +0800
From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20151124130151.GD29832@ad.usersys.redhat.com>
References: <1448342531-16407-1-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<1448342531-16407-2-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<56544E4F.9090104@redhat.com>
	<20151124125005.GC29832@ad.usersys.redhat.com>
	<56545D3A.9000606@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56545D3A.9000606@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.6 01/14] block: Add "file" output
 parameter to block status query functions
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>, Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

On Tue, 11/24 13:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 24/11/2015 13:50, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > > +    if (bs->file && *file == bs->file->bs &&
> > > 
> > > This check is unnecessary, just use "if (file)".
> > 
> > "file" would be bs in the case of protocol, and this function will infinitely
> > recurse.
> 
> Oh, that's right!  But then I think we want to check that and allow
> recursion to any *file, not just bs->file->bs.
> 

That makes sense, I'll make it to.

Fam