From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36125)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1Um3Cj-00070J-LR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:36:22 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1Um3Cd-0004ZV-IL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:36:17 -0400
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 16:36:07 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130610143607.GL3636@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com>
References: <1370855253-7842-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>
	<20130610140454.GI3636@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com>
	<20130610143223.GA4838@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130610143223.GA4838@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vmdk: byteswap VMDK4Header.desc_offset
	field
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: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, qemu-stable@nongnu.org

Am 10.06.2013 um 16:32 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:04:55PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 10.06.2013 um 11:07 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> > > Remember to byteswap VMDK4Header.desc_offset on big-endian machines.
> > > 
> > > Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Thanks, applied to the block layer.
> > 
> > > @@ -507,8 +507,11 @@ static int vmdk_open_vmdk4(BlockDriverState *bs,
> > >      if (ret < 0) {
> > >          return ret;
> > >      }
> > > -    if (header.capacity == 0 && header.desc_offset) {
> > > -        return vmdk_open_desc_file(bs, flags, header.desc_offset << 9);
> > > +    if (header.capacity == 0) {
> > > +        int64_t desc_offset = le64_to_cpu(header.desc_offset);
> > > +        if (desc_offset) {
> > > +            return vmdk_open_desc_file(bs, flags, desc_offset << 9);
> > > +        }
> > >      }
> > 
> > Splitting up the if condition wouldn't have been necessary, strictly
> > speaking. But I don't mind too much here.
> 
> True.  The reason I did it is because accessing header.desc_offset
> directly is a bad habit.  Someone modifying the code might conclude it's
> safe to access directly when it actually only works for the limited
> cases of zero and non-zero.

It just looks a bit weird because you're still doing the same for
header.capacity and there's no real reason for treating the two fields
differently.

Kevin