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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=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 DEB63C3A59F for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:40:22 +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 B47A7217F5 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:40:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B47A7217F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:52940 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i2FEL-0003z7-VS for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:40:21 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35885) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i2FDX-0003Vv-CE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:39:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i2FDW-00087U-AD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:39:31 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35626) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i2FDU-00085T-02; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:39:28 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20913308FC22; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maximlenovopc.usersys.redhat.com (unknown [10.35.206.67]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C08F360BE2; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:39:19 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1d416bb16a97942526d53a1028f14f96be68ba92.camel@redhat.com> From: Maxim Levitsky To: Eric Blake , "Daniel P." =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Berrang=E9?= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:39:18 +0300 In-Reply-To: <0cd8b90e-db47-676d-bb5a-25c70a1c1598@redhat.com> References: <20190814202219.1870-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com> <20190814202219.1870-7-mlevitsk@redhat.com> <20190822110448.GK3267@redhat.com> <0cd8b90e-db47-676d-bb5a-25c70a1c1598@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.43]); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:39:27 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 06/13] qcrypto-luks: implement more rigorous header checking 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: Kevin Wolf , Fam Zheng , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Max Reitz , Stefan Hajnoczi Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 08:31 -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 8/25/19 11:08 AM, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > > > I'd do a separate check for stripes and active fields, and then give a > > > > specific error message for each. That way if this does ever trigger > > > > in practice will immediately understand which check failed. > > > > > > > > Also using '%d' rather than '%i' is more common convention > > > > > > Done. > > > > Note that I switched i,j to be size_t since you said that you prefer this, > > and to print this I apparently need %lu. > > Actually, for size_t, you need %zu. %lu/size_t will cause warnings on > 32-bit platforms. > > Thank you! I have read something like that on the internet, but I wondered, what actually is the most portable way. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky