From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:49496)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RBweG-0000Zi-CN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:42:41 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RBweE-0002Dy-Ky
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:42:40 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36600)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <quintela@redhat.com>) id 1RBweE-0002Dp-Do
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:42:38 -0400
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p96MgbYJ019409
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 18:42:37 -0400
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E8DD6D1.7020708@redhat.com> (Paolo Bonzini's message of "Thu,
	06 Oct 2011 18:26:57 +0200")
References: <cover.1317911543.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<e05dc090635502a743faa3512d08bcc2041841db.1317911543.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<4E8DD6D1.7020708@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 00:42:36 +0200
Message-ID: <m3ipo13foj.fsf@trasno.mitica>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] savevm: improve subsections detection
	on load
Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 06:21 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> +
>> +int qemu_get_buffer(QEMUFile *f, uint8_t *buf, int size)
>> +{
>> +    int pending = size;
>> +    int done = 0;
>> +
>> +    while (pending>  0) {
>> +        int res;
>> +
>> +        res = qemu_peek_buffer(f, buf, pending, 0);
>> +        if (res == 0) {
>> +            return 0;

should this line return "done" insntead?

>>           }
>> -        memcpy(buf, f->buf + f->buf_index, l);
>> -        f->buf_index += l;
>> -        buf += l;
>> -        size -= l;
>> +        qemu_file_skip(f, res);
>> +        buf += res;
>> +        pending -= res;
>> +        done += res;
>>       }
>> -    return size1 - size;
>> +    return done;
>>   }
>
> This changes semantics for reads above 32KB.  It should be in the
> commit message, or preferably v1 could be committed instead. :)

how it changes?  My understanding is that we read the same, only change
that I can think of is the one that I have jsut shown (and that is on
the error case).

Later, Juan.