From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51064) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpdFP-0005JR-J7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 12:32:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpdFL-00037K-Ec for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 12:32:15 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50634) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpdFL-00036Z-8z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 12:32:11 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EC18C049E31 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 16:32:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:32:05 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20170906163205.GX15510@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <20170906115143.27451-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20170906115143.27451-2-quintela@redhat.com> <7e71d190-8e49-ca6b-ef44-522100b27b8c@redhat.com> <87pob351o5.fsf@secure.mitica> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87pob351o5.fsf@secure.mitica> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 01/22] Revert "io: add new qio_channel_{readv, writev, read, write}_all functions" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Juan Quintela Cc: Eric Blake , lvivier@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, peterx@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 04:42:18PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: > Eric Blake wrote: > > On 09/06/2017 06:51 AM, Juan Quintela wrote: > >> This reverts commit d4622e55883211072621958d39ddaa73483d201e. > > > > But with no reason why? What bugs are you fixing by reverting this? > > I put it on the cover letter. I am investigating *why* it fails on me. > It got the thread handed. Your functions return the number of bytes written. My impl only returns the 0 or -1 on the basis that the caller does not need to know how many bytes were written - its always exactly the amount asked for. You probably need to adjust your code to take that into account. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|