18.01.2022 16:31, Hanna Reitz wrote:
+/*
+ * bdrv_dirty_bitmap_status:
+ * @hb: The HBitmap to operate on
+ * @start: the offset to start from
+ * @end: end of requested area
+ * @is_dirty: is bitmap dirty at @offset
+ * @pnum: how many bits has same value starting from @offset
+ */
+void hbitmap_status(const HBitmap *hb, int64_t offset, int64_t bytes,
In addition to the comment not fitting the parameter names, I also don’t find
it ideal that the parameter names here don’t match the ones in the function’s
definition.
I don’t have a preference between `start` or `offset` (although most other
bitmap functions seem to prefer `start`), but I do prefer `count` over `bytes`,
because... Well, it’s a bit count, not a byte count, right? (And from the
bitmap user’s perspective, those bits might stand for any arbitrary unit.)
Apart from that, looks nice to me. I am wondering a bit why this function
doesn’t simply return the dirty bit status (like, well, the block-status
functions do it), but I presume you simply found this interface to be better
suited for its callers.
Hmm, seems, no reason for it actually. Will change to use normal return value.
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
