From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40667C432BE for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 21:18:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C588760E77 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 21:18:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org C588760E77 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:45744 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mJ0IP-0000wg-Ix for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:18:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36302) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mJ0Hm-00007Q-Lc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:18:14 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:26025) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mJ0Hk-0005z2-5d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:18:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1629926291; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=B1jY29D6dpiLLHQNutxXjRvVxreHgsWJmw5TQtcBaDw=; b=Hq9vPjNPK0CbMMv92l4K73x1tm/wy5deepZFW74/np/DYdrwI6Tb6mmVa6FE0bKyGi/Lbi PxWpG10lu+8uCJaDvah5s4duAdDtdASoOXvSornuLNyNVoKgkzFkfEhbbClp3jRCIdrXfF 168FGaOHKl7xfEymVhB88O7RQ4+M1xc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-297-vn5YaxClN5m3b5UwhKyS7A-1; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:18:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: vn5YaxClN5m3b5UwhKyS7A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04ED5189610B; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 21:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.22.32.130]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE372C00F; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 21:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:18:05 -0400 From: Eduardo Habkost To: Luis Fernando Fujita Pires Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/19] host-utils: move abs64() to host-utils Message-ID: <20210825211805.cn6iodnnibn2vd6i@habkost.net> References: <20210824142730.102421-1-luis.pires@eldorado.org.br> <20210824142730.102421-3-luis.pires@eldorado.org.br> <20210825202638.2vtjxcsau2cghbr3@habkost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=ehabkost@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=ehabkost@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.745, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "richard.henderson@linaro.org" , "groug@kaod.org" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "qemu-ppc@nongnu.org" , Paolo Bonzini , David Gibson Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 08:37:17PM +0000, Luis Fernando Fujita Pires wrote: > From: Eduardo Habkost > > > > Right, that's true of any standard implementation of abs(). > > > I thought about making it return uint64_t, but that could make it > > > weird for other uses of abs64(), where callers wouldn't expect a type > > > change from int64_t to uint64_t. Maybe create a separate uabs64() that > > > returns uint64_t? Or is that even weirder? :) > > > > Which users of abs64 would expect it to return int64_t? > > kvm_pit_update_clock_offset() doesn't seem to. > > Oh, I wasn't referring to any specific users. What I meant is > that, if we make abs64() generically available from host-utils, > callers could expect it to behave the same way as abs() in > stdlib, for example. That would be surprising, but do you think there are cases where that would be a bad surprise? I don't think anybody who is aware of the abs(INT_MIN), labs(LONG_MIN), and llabs(LLONG_MIN) edge cases actually _like_ that behaviour. If you really want to avoid surprises, providing a saner function with a different name seems better than trying to emulate the edge cases of abs()/labs()/llabs(). -- Eduardo