From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33884) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIDft-00052S-Sc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 08:33:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIDfp-0003eN-T6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 08:33:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35503) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIDfp-0003dU-Ma for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 08:33:25 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20170531135709.345-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <20170531135709.345-20-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <87y3tabikl.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 14:33:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau"'s message of "Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:05:01 +0000") Message-ID: <8760g9thwt.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 19/45] qdev: add unsigned properties List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 6:00 PM Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 5:55 PM Markus Armbruster >> wrote: >> >>> Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: >>> >>> > Add and use unsigned type for various properties. >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau >>> >>> The commit message is a bit misleading. We don't "add unsigned >>> properties", we clean up the property code to avoid type casts between >>> signed and unsigned. >>> >> >> That in itself is imho a good reason for the cleanup :) I could accept that with a commit message that says so :) > There might be other reason, as if a value is stored as negative QNum/i64 > after cast, and later retrieve with get_uint(), it will fail. I see. >>> I'm not sure that's worth the churn by itself. But perhaps it helps >>> later in this series. If yes, can you give me a hint? >>> >> >> Churn is quite minimal though.