On 04/26/2017 04:41 PM, John Snow wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/17/2017 09:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> In the process of converting sector-based interfaces to bytes,
>> I'm finding it easier to represent a byte count as a 64-bit
>> integer at the block layer (even if we are internally capped
>> by SIZE_MAX or even INT_MAX for individual transactions, it's
>> still nicer to not have to worry about truncation/overflow
>> issues on as many variables).  Update the signature of
>> bdrv_round_to_clusters() to uniformly use uint64_t, matching
>                                             ^^^^^^^^
> 
> While we're here, since you went with int64_t in the end, what steered
> you away from uint64_t, or was that just a thinko?

Later patches were made easier with signed (the compiler complained when
I mixed signed and unsigned pointers).

> 
> (AFAICT: off_t is usually something like int64_t, so your choice makes
> sense to me, generally.)

Indeed, and that's something I should update my commit message to mention.

> 
> --js
> 
>> the signature already chosen for bdrv_is_allocated, and
>> adjust clients according to the required fallout.

If you want me to try and use uint64_t *pnum instead of int64_t *pnum
throughout both my series 1  (the changes to bdrv_is_allocated) and this
one, it will take more effort.  I'll do it if there's a reason, but I'd
rather not if the signed version is good enough.

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