[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [Nbd] [PATCH 2/2] NBD proto: add GET_LBA_STATUS extensi

From: Wouter Verhelst
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Nbd] [PATCH 2/2] NBD proto: add GET_LBA_STATUS extension
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 16:53:19 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 04:33:42PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 24/03/2016 16:25, Eric Blake wrote:
> >> However, let's make these bits, so that
> >>
> >> NBD_STATE_ALLOCATED (0x1), LBA extent is present on the block device
> >> NBD_STATE_ZERO (0x2), LBA extent will read as zeroes
> > 
> > Should we flip the sense and call this NBD_STATE_UNALLOCATED (0 means
> > allocated, 1 means not present), so that an overall status of 0 is a
> > safe default?
> Double negations are evil (and don't work the same in all languages), so
> I think it's a worse option.

I agree that a bit which says "unallocated" is confusing in that manner,
but that just means we need a better name (one that doesn't contain
"un-" or "not")

I like the idea of having zero be the "sensible" default, although I'm
quite unable to come up with a better name myself.

< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
       people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
       and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
 -- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]