From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46828) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TwFoS-0000wB-4l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:33:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TwFoQ-0005NC-UN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:33:08 -0500 Received: from mx3-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.24]:43828) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TwFoQ-0005N8-LQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:33:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:33:05 -0500 (EST) From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <1969801593.8205260.1358530385700.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <50F980E9.9000409@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/12] mirror: perform COW if the cluster size is bigger than the granularity List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com > Am 18.01.2013 17:22, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > > I haven't written a testcase for it, it's tricky but should be > > doable. > > Do you want me to respin, or can it be done as a followup? > > I think I would prefer a respin, but if you think otherwise, I won't > insist. Okay, I'll respin. I'll just note that this series now is in danger of missing 1.4 (after 1.2 and 1.3) because only Laszlo and Eric gave it a decent review in the six months since it was first posted. Had I been employed by any other company, I'd probably just have kept the code in house and forgotten about upstream. > Also, wouldn't we backport the fixed version in the first place so that > a pointer isn't even needed? This code doesn't seem to exist yet in > RHEL 6. Oops, you're right. We fixed the problem in a different way. Paolo