From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JBW0Y-0007da-J7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 08:57:46 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JBW0X-0007aj-0e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 08:57:46 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBW0W-0007ag-Ue for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 08:57:44 -0500 Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.48]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JBW0W-0002cc-Fz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 08:57:44 -0500 Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20080106135845.SFXS6054.mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:58:45 +0000 Received: from miranda.arrow ([213.107.26.151]) by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20080106135954.TGSU26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@miranda.arrow> for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:59:54 +0000 Received: from sdb by miranda.arrow with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBW0Q-0001W1-Lc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:57:38 +0000 Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:57:38 +0000 From: Stuart Brady Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND] [PATCH] ide: fix GET_CONFIGURATION DVD-ROM support Message-ID: <20080106135738.GA5781@miranda.arrow> References: <20071226073615.GB25052@tapir> <200801041825.26304.rob@landley.net> <20080105010230.GA2230@miranda.arrow> <200801042153.09808.rob@landley.net> <20080105102834.GA3379@miranda.arrow> <20080106022233.GB27577@tapir> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080106022233.GB27577@tapir> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:22:33PM -0600, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote: > the exact number of sectors is really not that relevant, as the whole point > here is to try to detect if it is a CD (700MB) or a DVD (4.7GB) and the logic > is just assuming that if it has more sectors than you should normally expect > in a CD, then it is a DVD. My answer was quite relevant to Rob's question, which was "Where does the constant come from, anyway?" As for the code, there's a choice between using an incorrect value, and correctly detecting for the vast majority of cases, and using the correct value and correctly detecting for 100% of cases. Perhaps "only marginally broken" is "good enough", seeing as nobody's complained. > but I had already enough problems trying to get this > merged without trying to change the code that much to try to guess a better > magic number than the one was originally used (I like 1440000 though) Sorry, but did anyone complain? No. -- Stuart Brady