From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] libxl,
 hvmloader: Don't relocate memory for MMIO hole
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:59:45 +0100
Message-ID: <51C2E0A1.3060202@eu.citrix.com>
References: <1371573984-28514-1-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
	<1371573984-28514-5-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1306191754390.4548@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<51C2C9E0.6060006@eu.citrix.com>
	<51C2F1A502000078000DF4B7@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<51C2D77D.90103@eu.citrix.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1306201126470.4548@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<51C2FBF202000078000DF53F@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <51C2FBF202000078000DF53F@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Hanweidong <hanweidong@huawei.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 20/06/13 11:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 20.06.13 at 12:29, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 20/06/13 11:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> However, if we want to be on the safe side and also make the
>>>> code work with a compiler that doesn't have a built-in _Bool, I'd
>>>> think
>>>>
>>>>       allow_memory_relocate = !s || strtoll(s, NULL, 0);
>>>>
>>>> would be the better statement (without any if() surrounding it,
>>>> and without the variable declaration having an initializer.
>>> Doing this would effectively hide the "default" value.  This is bad because 1)
>>> it's not clear what the default is to someone just scanning the code, 2) it's
>>> hard to change.  (Consider how you'd modify the above statement if you wanted
>>> to default to 0 instead.)
>> I would avoid the strtoll altogether:
>>
>> if (s != NULL && s[0] != '0')
>>      allow_memory_relocate = 1;
>> else
>>      allow_memory_relocate = 0;
> Let's not add hacks like this - a string of "0x1" ought to not be
> mis-interpreted as meaning 0.

I'm pretty sure the xs protocol specifies "0" or "1" for booleans, so 
"0x1" would be undefined anyway.

  -George