[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qapi/string-putput-visitor: fix bugs
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qapi/string-putput-visitor: fix bugs |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:46:42 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 |
On 06/18/2014 09:37 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> in human mode, we are creating the string:
>
> 16-31 (16-31)
>
> instead of
>
> 16-17 (10-1f)
>
> because we forgot to pass 'true' as the human parameter on one of the
> two calls to format_string.
> Also, this is a worsening of quality; previously we would produce
>
> 16 (0x10)
>
> to make it obvious which number was hex.
> Fix these issues.
>
> Reported-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
> ---
> qapi/string-output-visitor.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/qapi/string-output-visitor.c b/qapi/string-output-visitor.c
> index 8735b00..e9aca3b 100644
> --- a/qapi/string-output-visitor.c
> +++ b/qapi/string-output-visitor.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static void format_string(StringOutputVisitor *sov, Range
> *r, bool next,
> {
> if (r->end - r->begin > 1) {
> if (human) {
> - g_string_append_printf(sov->string, "%" PRIx64 "-%" PRIx64,
> + g_string_append_printf(sov->string, "0x%" PRIx64 "-%" PRIx64,
The pre-series code used "%#"PRIx64 instead of "0x%"PRIx64; the only
difference is that you now output 0x0 instead of 0 if that happens to be
one of the values of the range. I personally think "0 (0x0)" is nicer
than the shorter "0 (0)", so I'm okay with it.
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature