From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43841) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a453V-0006yZ-T1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:54:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a453Q-0003Ku-QK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:54:37 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54187) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a453Q-0003Kk-KZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:54:32 -0500 References: <1449052989-30152-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <87fuzlktz2.fsf@emacs.mitica> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <565ECDE1.9030604@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 11:54:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87fuzlktz2.fsf@emacs.mitica> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [For 2.5?? PATCH 1/1] qemu_{real_}host_page_[size|mask] change types to ram_addr_t List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: quintela@redhat.com, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" Cc: anthony.perard@citrix.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com On 02/12/2015 11:47, Juan Quintela wrote: > Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela > > If nobody complains, I will sent this on next migration pull requset. > > Paolo, I think that I preffer this that trusting the intptr_t sign > extension, but I can be convinced either way. What do you think? It's not trusting, it's the way C works, but I'm okay either way. Paolo