Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] conf: use proper maximum for parsing memory values

On 10/30/2014 09:49 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote: > The value is stored in unsigned long long, so ULLONG_MAX is the proper > upper limit to use. No, it's not. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan(a)redhat.com&gt; > --- > Even though this is a build-breaker (for 32bit systems > memtune-unlimited fails to parse), I'm not pushing it as one because > it feels odd that such change wouldn't break anything else. What's the compile failure? This patch is intentionally trying to fit the largest value that will fit in an unsigned long when scaled by kilobytes, while still parsing by bytes. Thus, on 64-bit machines, you can parse 0xffffffffffffffff bytes, then scale down by 1024 and store in unsigned long; on 32-bit machines, your maximum has to be limited to 0xffffffff*1024 bytes before scaling back down.