From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIzQN-00041g-Jw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 07:51:20 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIzQK-0007MM-99 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 07:51:19 -0500 Received: from mail-wg0-x236.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::236]:63351) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIzQK-0007LR-1s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 07:51:16 -0500 Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id b13so1473215wgh.13 for ; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 04:51:15 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <54D215BE.2000303@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 13:51:10 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1422967948-3261-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1422967948-3261-7-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20150204031036.GD12948@ad.nay.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20150204031036.GD12948@ad.nay.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/9] cosmetic changes preparing for the following patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Fam Zheng Cc: Mike Day , peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, fred.konrad@greensocs.com On 04/02/2015 04:10, Fam Zheng wrote: >> > - return; > Other changes are equivalent, but not quite for this one. But I think it is > still correct, so: > > Reviewed-by: Fam Zheng True, this is not entirely cosmetic. Still, the loop is guaranteed to only hit one block, because of the check on offset. Removing the "return;" matches what we do in the RAM_PREALLOC case. Paolo