From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=43516 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ovxft-0004EX-Ne
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:29:50 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>) id 1Ovxfo-0005Gv-Rs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:29:45 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39191)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>) id 1Ovxfo-0005Gq-K7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:29:40 -0400
Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8FJTdp2014337
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:29:39 -0400
Message-ID: <4C911E9A.2020502@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:29:30 +0200
From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1284553440-17985-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>	<1284553440-17985-3-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<m3sk1bdprz.fsf@trasno.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3sk1bdprz.fsf@trasno.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/5] Support human unit formats in
	strtobytes, eg. 1.0G
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com

On 09/15/10 16:50, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com wrote:
>> From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
>>          value <<= 10;
>>          break;
>>      case 0:
>> +        if (divider) {
>> +            value = 0;
>> +            break;
> 
> changing break by goto fail here?
> 1.5G and 1.0G is ok, but using 1024.00  or similar should be one error,
> no?
> 
> nice cleanup for the rest of the patch series.

In my testing, 1234.5 fails as expected, so I expect 1024.00 to fail as
well.

Cheers,
Jes