qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] qapi: Add qobject_is_equal()
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:15:09 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7e9bdf55-c11d-e7cd-d92b-5ccef7e48d3c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98cccb52-4fca-2625-5f69-30c348962377@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2196 bytes --]

On 07/05/2017 08:48 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
>>>  /**
>>> + * qnum_is_equal(): Test whether the two QNums are equal
>>> + */
>>> +bool qnum_is_equal(const QObject *x, const QObject *y)
>>> +{
>>> +    QNum *num_x = qobject_to_qnum(x);
>>> +    QNum *num_y = qobject_to_qnum(y);
>>> +
>>> +    switch (num_x->kind) {
>>> +    case QNUM_I64:
>>> +        switch (num_y->kind) {
>>> +        case QNUM_I64:
>>> +            /* Comparison in native int64_t type */
>>> +            return num_x->u.i64 == num_y->u.i64;
>>> +        case QNUM_U64:
>>> +            /* Implicit conversion of x to uin64_t, so we have to
>>> +             * check its sign before */
>>> +            return num_x->u.i64 >= 0 && num_x->u.i64 == num_y->u.u64;
>>> +        case QNUM_DOUBLE:
>>> +            /* Implicit conversion of x to double; no overflow
>>> +             * possible */
>>> +            return num_x->u.i64 == num_y->u.dbl;
>>
>> Overflow is impossible, but loss of precision is possible:
>>
>>     (double)9007199254740993ull == 9007199254740992.0
>>
>> yields true.  Is this what we want?
> 
> I'd argue that yes, because the floating point value represents
> basically all of the values which are "equal" to it.

But the problem is that we CAN represent the fully-precise number as an
integer, so having multiple distinct integers that compare differently
against each other, but equal to the same double, is awkward.

> 
> But I don't have a string opinion. I guess the alternative would be to
> convert the double to an integer instead and check for overflows before?

That's the solution Markus gave, and I'm in favor of the tighter check:

> 
>> I guess the obvious fix is
>>
>>     return (double)x == x && x == y;
> 
> Yes, that would do, too; and spares me of having to think about how well
> comparing an arbitrary double to UINT64_MAX actually works. :-)

It basically says that we are unwilling to declare an integer equivalent
to the double if the double loses precision when trying to store the
integer.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 604 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-05 14:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-03 12:25 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/5] block: Don't compare strings in bdrv_reopen_prepare() Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:25 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] qapi/qnull: Add own header Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:35   ` Eric Blake
2017-07-03 12:25 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] qapi: Add qobject_is_equal() Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:44   ` Eric Blake
2017-07-05  7:07   ` Markus Armbruster
2017-07-05 13:48     ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05 14:15       ` Eric Blake [this message]
2017-07-05 16:11         ` Markus Armbruster
2017-07-05 16:05       ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05 16:22         ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05 16:29           ` Eric Blake
2017-07-05 17:00             ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05 17:04               ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05 17:22                 ` Eric Blake
2017-07-05 17:18               ` Eric Blake
2017-07-05 16:30           ` Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:25 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 3/5] block: qobject_is_equal() in bdrv_reopen_prepare() Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:51   ` Eric Blake
2017-07-03 13:01     ` Max Reitz
2017-07-03 14:29       ` Eric Blake
2017-07-05  7:14   ` Markus Armbruster
2017-07-05 17:50     ` Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:25 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/5] iotests: Add test for non-string option reopening Max Reitz
2017-07-03 12:25 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 5/5] tests: Add check-qobject for equality tests Max Reitz
2017-07-03 14:15   ` Eric Blake
2017-07-03 16:13     ` Max Reitz
2017-07-05  7:22   ` Markus Armbruster

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7e9bdf55-c11d-e7cd-d92b-5ccef7e48d3c@redhat.com \
    --to=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).