From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3o9j-0003Oo-NV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:10:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3o9d-0006ph-K1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:10:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48755) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3o9d-0006pa-DF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:10:29 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 16:10:22 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20130729141022.GJ10467@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1374762197-7261-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1374762197-7261-5-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20130729131344.GD10467@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <51F6727A.8090102@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51F6727A.8090102@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 04/19] block: update bs->total_sectors on writes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: pl@kamp.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com Am 29.07.2013 um 15:47 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: > Il 29/07/2013 15:13, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: > > Am 25.07.2013 um 16:23 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: > >> If a BlockDriverState is growable, after every write we need to > >> check if bs->total_sectors might have changed. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini > >> --- > >> block.c | 3 +++ > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c > >> index 6cd39fa..ebac2fa 100644 > >> --- a/block.c > >> +++ b/block.c > >> @@ -2651,6 +2651,9 @@ static int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_do_writev(BlockDriverState *bs, > >> if (bs->wr_highest_sector < sector_num + nb_sectors - 1) { > >> bs->wr_highest_sector = sector_num + nb_sectors - 1; > >> } > >> + if (bs->growable && ret >= 0) { > >> + bs->total_sectors = MAX(bs->total_sectors, sector_num + nb_sectors); > >> + } > > > > Can we change bdrv_getlength() to use bs->total_sectors even for > > growable images after this patch? > > Probably, but not in 1.6. :) "Probably" was my conclusion as well. The answer to this question is the answer to whether this patch makes sense, I think. So I can give you a Probably-reviewed-by if that's of any use. ;-) FWIW, I've got the feeling that the whole series might be better suited for block-next. Is there anything urgent in it? Kevin