Re: [Libguestfs] [PATCH nbdkit 2/2] python: More precise Python parameter passing
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 12:24 AM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 12:03:44AM +0200, Nir Soffer wrote:
> This is not needed. I think the accepted way to pass boolean values
> to python is "i". Internally python True and False are 1 and 0, and
> you can use them as such:
The documentation suggests "p" for bools:
https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/arg.html#c.Py_BuildValue
According to the docs, "p" is only for parsing arguments:
https://docs.python.org/3.6/c-api/arg.html#parsing-arguments
And for building value there is no such option:
https://docs.python.org/3.6/c-api/arg.html#building-values
But that's not relevant for the patch because:
...
> However PyObject_CallFunctionObjArgs is more efficient than
> PyObject_CallFunction
> so this looks good.
Indeed.
> 0x10_0000_0000 is very confusing, why not 64 * GiB?
>
> For the zero count, should we use 2**32 - 1 to make sure zero
> works with the maximum count?
Is "GiB" defined somewhere?
>>> print(GiB)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
NameError: name 'GiB' is not defined
We use this in vdsm:
https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/blob/master/lib/vdsm/common/units.py
qemu also have:
https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/master/include/qemu/units.h