From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44361) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dcAke-0004kV-Ma for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:28:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dcAkb-0007hK-In for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:28:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dcAkb-0007gg-BY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:28:49 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <150127405114.4205.4905957472648540492.malonedeb@gac.canonical.com> <87shhd9f89.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:28:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Eric Blake's message of "Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:39:13 -0500") Message-ID: <87tw1s3fci.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1707297] [NEW] qemu became more picky parsing -m option List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: John Florian <1707297@bugs.launchpad.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Eric Blake writes: > On 07/31/2017 03:34 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> John Florian <1707297@bugs.launchpad.net> writes: >> >>> Public bug reported: >>> >>> With qemu-kvm-2.9.0-3.fc26.x86_64 I am no longer to specify the memory >>> size using something like "-m 1.00000GiB" but with qemu- >>> kvm-2.7.1-7.fc25.x86_64 I could without any problem. I now get an error >>> message like: >>> >>> qemu-system-x86_64: -m 1.00000GiB: Parameter 'size' expects a non-negative number below 2^64 >>> Optional suffix k, M, G, T, P or E means kilo-, mega-, giga-, tera-, peta- >>> and exabytes, respectively. >>> >>> >>> Is this expected or a regression? >> >> We recognize suffix "G". Before commit 75cdcd1 (v2.9.0), trailing >> garbage after a recognized suffix was silently ignored. "1.0G", >> "1.0GiB", "1.0Garbage-trucks-of-RAM" were all the same to QEMU. No >> more. >> >> All clear? > > That said, virsh from libvirt manages to recognize 'G' and 'GiB' as > synonyms (powers of 2), as well as 'GB' (powers of 10); we could justify > patching qemu's parser to accept more valid suffixes, particularly since > 'GiB' is a typical suffix that has seen use (in spite of it not being > documented). I wouldn't object to such a patch, as long as it doesn't regress consistency. Easy if we do "number with suffix" in just one place. We might already do it, but I can't say offhand. Also, the patch probably shouldn't change qemu_strtosz_metric().