From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50419)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mjt@tls.msk.ru>) id 1S7XVI-0008H5-Lg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:35:32 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mjt@tls.msk.ru>) id 1S7XVD-00029k-W1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:35:28 -0400
Received: from isrv.corpit.ru ([86.62.121.231]:41937)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mjt@tls.msk.ru>) id 1S7XVD-00029e-OK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:35:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4F5FA178.9060206@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 23:35:20 +0400
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1331579663-29950-1-git-send-email-mjt@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
	<1331579663-29950-9-git-send-email-mjt@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
	<jjo1hi$35k$1@dough.gmane.org> <4F5F8B8D.9010202@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F5F8B8D.9010202@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 8/9] cleanup qemu_co_sendv(),
 qemu_co_recvv() and friends
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 13.03.2012 22:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

>>>  ssize_t qemu_sendv_recvv(int sockfd, struct iovec *iov,
>>>                           size_t offset, size_t bytes, bool do_sendv);

> Hmm, since you are at it however, perhaps you could add an argument to
> these functions and qemu_sendv_recvv for the length of the iovec, so
> that it can detect out-of-bounds access.

Yes such an argument may be needed here, and this function
looks differently from the usual iov_* family in this very
place: lack of iov_cnt.

>    This would also "fix" the fact
> that you changed the signature of the function in a compatible way,
> while making the API incompatible.  As you prefer, but we can call it a
> deal for the #defines. ;)

Heh for the #defines.  Defines are fine when used properly,
really.  In this case, the #define just adds an argument
and nothing more.

For qemu_sendv and qemu_recvv, I'll just go for renaming these
to be iov_send and iov_recv, and move them to iov.[ch].

And for qemu_co_sendv()&Co, which actually _are_ used, this
wont help anyway.  Or I can rename them to qemu_iovec_co_send(),
to catch the change.  But it becomes longer... :(

What do you think?

Thank you!

/mjt