On Wed, 2019-07-03 at 10:13 -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 11/5/20 2:31 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> > On 05.11.20 06:40, Tuguoyi wrote:
> >> As BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE is of type uint64_t, the expression will
> >> automatically convert the @ret to uint64_t. When an error code
> >> returned from bdrv_nb_sectors(
On 11/5/20 7:26 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
>> I actually preferred the v1 solution, rather than this v2, as it avoided
>> a cast.
>
> I don’t, because it doesn’t make the ?: go away, so I prefer the less
> invasive version.
>
> If you want to send your suggested version (that drops both ?:), I’m
> hap
On 05.11.20 14:14, Eric Blake wrote:
On 11/5/20 2:31 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 05.11.20 06:40, Tuguoyi wrote:
As BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE is of type uint64_t, the expression will
automatically convert the @ret to uint64_t. When an error code
returned from bdrv_nb_sectors(), the promoted @ret will be a ve
On 11/5/20 2:31 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 05.11.20 06:40, Tuguoyi wrote:
>> As BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE is of type uint64_t, the expression will
>> automatically convert the @ret to uint64_t. When an error code
>> returned from bdrv_nb_sectors(), the promoted @ret will be a very
>> large number, as a resul
On 05.11.20 06:40, Tuguoyi wrote:
As BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE is of type uint64_t, the expression will
automatically convert the @ret to uint64_t. When an error code
returned from bdrv_nb_sectors(), the promoted @ret will be a very
large number, as a result the -EFBIG will be returned which is not the
re
As BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE is of type uint64_t, the expression will
automatically convert the @ret to uint64_t. When an error code
returned from bdrv_nb_sectors(), the promoted @ret will be a very
large number, as a result the -EFBIG will be returned which is not the
real error code.
Signed-off-by: Guoyi