From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45098)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VCnae-0004tn-Sh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 05:23:38 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VCnaY-0006EU-4Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 05:23:32 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58097)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VCnaX-0006Ce-JO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 05:23:25 -0400
Message-ID: <521729D9.6040409@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 11:22:33 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1377069536-12658-1-git-send-email-lilei@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1377069536-12658-5-git-send-email-lilei@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<52149998.7070004@redhat.com> <5216D488.2090305@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1346435024.3140056.1377236057706.JavaMail.root@redhat.com>
	<5217275C.3030104@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <521727F2.8070007@redhat.com>
	<521728DC.1060109@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <521728DC.1060109@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/18] savevm: set right return value for
 qemu_file_rate_limit
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: Lei Li <lilei@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mrhines@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, lagarcia@br.ibm.com, rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com

Il 23/08/2013 11:18, Lei Li ha scritto:
>>>
>>> And now as qemu_file_rate_limit() never return negative value, what's
>>> the
>>> meaning for the check: if (qemu_file_rate_limit(f) < 0) in
>>> ram_save_iterate()?
>> I only see a "while ((ret = qemu_file_rate_limit(f)) == 0)", no
>> less-than-zero check.
>>
>> Are we looking at the same code? :)
> 
> I think so, hehe.
> You might want to look a little more. After the while(..), there is a
> check:
> 
> if (ret < 0) {
>     bytes_transferred += total_sent;
>     return ret;
> }

Aha, there you are.  It's dead code, you can delete it.

Paolo