From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57898)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <pl@kamp.de>)
	id 1VKOMs-0007Hr-5l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 04:04:47 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pl@kamp.de>) id 1VKOMm-0006g1-Ir
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 04:04:42 -0400
Received: from mx.ipv6.kamp.de ([2a02:248:0:51::16]:36401 helo=mx01.kamp.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <pl@kamp.de>)
	id 1VKOMm-0006fp-8I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 04:04:36 -0400
Message-ID: <5232C711.4050708@kamp.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:04:33 +0200
From: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1378481953-23099-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>
	<1378481953-23099-31-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1378481953-23099-31-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 30/42] block: define get_block_status return
 value
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@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>

On 06.09.2013 17:39, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>
> Define the return value of get_block_status.  Bits 0, 1, 2 and 9-62
> are valid; bit 63 (the sign bit) is reserved for errors.  Bits 3-8
> are left for future extensions.
>
> The return code is compatible with the old is_allocated API: if a driver
> only returns 0 or 1 (aka BDRV_BLOCK_DATA) like is_allocated used to,
> clients of is_allocated will not have any change in behavior.  Still,
> we will return more precise information in the next patches and the
> new definition of bdrv_is_allocated is already prepared for this.
>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> ---
>   block.c               | 10 ++++++++--
>   include/block/block.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
> index a5bfe74..97406ec 100644
> --- a/block.c
> +++ b/block.c
> @@ -3093,7 +3093,7 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn bdrv_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
>   
>       if (!bs->drv->bdrv_co_get_block_status) {
>           *pnum = nb_sectors;
> -        return 1;
> +        return BDRV_BLOCK_DATA;
>       }
>   
>       return bs->drv->bdrv_co_get_block_status(bs, sector_num, nb_sectors, pnum);
> @@ -3143,7 +3143,13 @@ int64_t bdrv_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t sector_num,
>   int coroutine_fn bdrv_is_allocated(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t sector_num,
>                                      int nb_sectors, int *pnum)
>   {
> -    return bdrv_get_block_status(bs, sector_num, nb_sectors, pnum);
> +    int64_t ret = bdrv_get_block_status(bs, sector_num, nb_sectors, pnum);
> +    if (ret < 0) {
sorry if I repeat myself.

isn't here a *pnum = 0 missing?

Peter


-- 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Peter Lieven

...........................................................

   KAMP Netzwerkdienste GmbH
   Vestische Str. 89-91 | 46117 Oberhausen
   Tel: +49 (0) 208.89 402-50 | Fax: +49 (0) 208.89 402-40
   pl@kamp.de | http://www.kamp.de

   Geschäftsführer: Heiner Lante | Michael Lante
   Amtsgericht Duisburg | HRB Nr. 12154
   USt-Id-Nr.: DE 120607556

...........................................................