From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51550)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1dO3Qo-0002CW-OE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:50:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1dO3Qn-0006bL-UI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:50:02 -0400
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:49:50 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20170622144950.GB4353@noname.redhat.com>
References: <20170613121639.17853-1-pbutsykin@virtuozzo.com>
	<20170613121639.17853-2-pbutsykin@virtuozzo.com>
	<b5367763-781e-0fdc-b9e7-fa6ee44ce66b@redhat.com>
	<e0966061-964c-95c5-20b2-904d651609dc@virtuozzo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e0966061-964c-95c5-20b2-904d651609dc@virtuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/4] qemu-img: add --shrink flag for
 resize
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: Pavel Butsykin <pbutsykin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, eblake@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, den@openvz.org

Am 22.06.2017 um 15:54 hat Pavel Butsykin geschrieben:
> On 22.06.2017 01:17, Max Reitz wrote:
> >On 2017-06-13 14:16, Pavel Butsykin wrote:
> >>The flag as additional precaution of data loss. Perhaps in the future the
> >>operation shrink without this flag will be banned, but while we need to
> >>maintain compatibility.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Pavel Butsykin <pbutsykin@virtuozzo.com>

> >The functional changes look good to me; even though I'd rather have it
> >an error for qcow2 now (even if that means having to check the image
> >format in img_resize(), and being inconsistent because you wouldn't need
> >--shrink for raw, but for qcow2 you would). But, well, I'm not going to
> >stop this series over that.
> >
> 
> Why shrink for qcow2 image is dangerous, but for raw is not dangerous? I
> think we should provide the same behavior for all formats. When --shrink
> option will become necessary, it also should be the same for all image
> formats.

It is dangerous for both, but for raw we can't enforce the flag
immediately without a deprecation period. With qcow2 we can (because it
is new functionality), so we might as well enforce it from the start.

Kevin