Re: [Xen-devel] find_next{,_zero}_bit() inconsistencies

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 29/08/2016 12:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in the context of
> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-08/msg03068.html
> I once again came across the different behavior our various
> implementations of the $subject functions, in particular their varying
> handling of the offset argument being greater / greater-or-equal
> the size argument. Shouldn't we settle on a single, uniform model,
> which might be
> 1) offset >= size is valid, returns size,
> 2) offset == size is valid, returns size, offset > size is invalid,
> 3) offset >= size is invalid.
>
> Thanks for opinions, Jan
>

A number of existing situations use size as an end sentinel, so option 3
will probably break things.

What did you have in mind for invalid?  Option 2 is probably the better
angle, especially for catching errors, but it is might show up some
existing latently-buggy code which would also need fixing.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel