[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/7] qapi: correctly parse uint64_t values fr
From: |
Markus Armbruster |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/7] qapi: correctly parse uint64_t values from strings |
Date: |
Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:44:06 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) |
Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> writes:
> David Hildenbrand <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Right now, we parse uint64_t values just like int64_t values, resulting
>> in negative values getting accepted and certain valid large numbers only
>> being representable as negative numbers. Also, reported errors indicate
>> that an int64_t is expected.
>>
>> Parse uin64_t separately. We don't have to worry about ranges.
>
> The commit message should mention *why* we don't we have to worry about
> ranges.
>
>>
>> E.g. we can now also specify
>> -device nvdimm,memdev=mem1,id=nv1,addr=0xFFFFFFFFC0000000
>> Instead of only going via negative values
>> -device nvdimm,memdev=mem1,id=nv1,addr=-0x40000000
>>
>> Resulting in the same values
>>
>> (qemu) info memory-devices
>> Memory device [nvdimm]: "nv1"
>> addr: 0xffffffffc0000000
>> slot: 0
>> node: 0
>>
>
> Suggest to mention this makes the string-input-visitor catch up with the
> qobject-input-visitor, which got changed similarly in commit
> 5923f85fb82.
One more thing: the qobject-input-visitor change also updated the
corresponding output visitor. Shouldn't we do the same here?
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 7/7] memory-device: rewrite address assignment using ranges, David Hildenbrand, 2018/10/23
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 5/7] memory-device: use QEMU_IS_ALIGNED, David Hildenbrand, 2018/10/23