From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55645 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PuW2i-0004Ta-8p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:19:41 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <hch@lst.de>) id 1PuW2g-0006Jn-Nw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:19:36 -0500
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:51256)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <hch@lst.de>)
	id 1PuW2g-0006J9-DD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:19:34 -0500
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 21:19:26 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] For AIO return -ENOSPC on short write
Message-ID: <20110301201926.GA11734@lst.de>
References: <1298369880-23859-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<1298369880-23859-2-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTimrQXxX-4eAmcJstB8g_apaaDqoCf6twhd2t=_D@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D63D217.9080206@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTi=kdSyfrqejZjYpmVbtN+_KSuBZVCQ7MzWZ9+if@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D63EB55.2000800@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D63EB55.2000800@redhat.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, hch@infradead.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:59:01PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/22/2011 04:16 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >Yes it is.  It doesn't explain it though.  The code involved here is
> >linux-aio.c and will be qcow2's bs->file.  That ought to be a
> >host_device and AFAIK that is not growable.  So I wanted to figure out
> >why we're even getting this far.  I expected the request to get
> >rejected in block.c when checking the range against the host_device.
> 
> Possibly a COW logical volume can give short writes on disk full?

It shouldn't.  If it does that needs fixing.