From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56672)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <berrange@redhat.com>) id 1YsRjA-0005Oo-BD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2015 04:09:17 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <berrange@redhat.com>) id 1YsRj6-0004MN-JP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2015 04:09:16 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:09:06 +0100
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20150513080906.GB23627@redhat.com>
References: <1431446962-9860-1-git-send-email-berrange@redhat.com>
	<1431446962-9860-5-git-send-email-berrange@redhat.com>
	<55524755.4010301@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55524755.4010301@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] qemu-io: prompt for encryption keys
 when required
Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:32:53PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 05/12/2015 10:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > The qemu-io tool does not check if the image is encrypted so
> > historically would silently corrupt the sectors by writing
> > plain text data into them instead of cipher text. The earlier
> > commit turns this mistake into a fatal abort, so check for
> > encryption and prompt for key when required.
> 
> Doesn't that mean that 'git bisect' gives a crashing qemu-io for 3
> patches?  Should this be rearranged so that 1/5 comes after this to
> avoid triggering the abort?

I'm ambivalent on that - previously qemu-io was data corrupting
for this scenario, so crashing isn't really that much worse :-)

It is easy enough to reorder these though if that's desired.
The latter patches have no build time dep on the 1st patch, so
its trivial for Kevin to re-order when applying if he thinks it
is worth it.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|