From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42348) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbS4p-000227-RJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:24:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbS4k-0006oK-25 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:24:03 -0500 Received: from mail.profihost.ag ([85.158.179.208]:34544) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TbS4j-0006oF-Ob for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:23:57 -0500 Message-ID: <50ADE115.4060707@profihost.ag> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 09:23:49 +0100 From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1353415495-30561-1-git-send-email-s.priebe@profihost.ag> <50AD096E.9080002@weilnetz.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] use int64_t for return values from rbd instead of int List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Stefan Weil , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, josh.durgin@inktank.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Am 21.11.2012 23:32, schrieb Peter Maydell: > On 21 November 2012 17:03, Stefan Weil wrote: >> Why do you use int64_t instead of off_t? >> If the value is related to file sizes, off_t would be a good choice. > > Looking at the librbd API (which is what the size and ret > values come from), it uses size_t and ssize_t for these. > So I think probably ssize_t is the right type for ret > (and size) in our structs here. This sounds reasonable but does ssize_t support negative values? For error values. Greets, Stefan