Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH v9 02/31] block: Use children list in bdrv_refresh_filename

[Ari Sundholm <ari@tuxera.com>]

On 07/22/2018 12:14 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 14:47, Ari Sundholm wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 06/28/2018 03:07 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
>>> bdrv_refresh_filename() should invoke itself recursively on all
>>> children, not just on file.
>>>
>>> With that change, we can remove the manual invocations in blkverify,
>>> quorum, commit, and mirror.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>    block.c           | 9 +++++----
>>>    block/blkverify.c | 3 ---
>>>    block/commit.c    | 1 -
>>>    block/mirror.c    | 1 -
>>>    block/quorum.c    | 1 -
>>>    5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
>>> index e418c97423..52247062d5 100644
>>> --- a/block.c
>>> +++ b/block.c
>>> @@ -5174,16 +5174,17 @@ static bool append_open_options(QDict *d,
>>> BlockDriverState *bs)
>>>    void bdrv_refresh_filename(BlockDriverState *bs)
>>>    {
>>>        BlockDriver *drv = bs->drv;
>>> +    BdrvChild *child;
>>>        QDict *opts;
>>>          if (!drv) {
>>>            return;
>>>        }
>>>    -    /* This BDS's file name will most probably depend on its file's
>>> name, so
>>> -     * refresh that first */
>>> -    if (bs->file) {
>>> -        bdrv_refresh_filename(bs->file->bs);
>>> +    /* This BDS's file name may depend on any of its children's file
>>> names, so
>>> +     * refresh those first */
>>> +    QLIST_FOREACH(child, &bs->children, next) {
>>> +        bdrv_refresh_filename(child->bs);
>>>        }
>>>          if (drv->bdrv_refresh_filename) {
>>> diff --git a/block/blkverify.c b/block/blkverify.c
>>> index da97ee5927..4a18baaf20 100644
>>> --- a/block/blkverify.c
>>> +++ b/block/blkverify.c
>>> @@ -285,9 +285,6 @@ static void
>>> blkverify_refresh_filename(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *options)
>>>    {
>>>        BDRVBlkverifyState *s = bs->opaque;
>>>    -    /* bs->file->bs has already been refreshed */
>>> -    bdrv_refresh_filename(s->test_file->bs);
>>> -
>>>        if (bs->file->bs->full_open_options
>>>            && s->test_file->bs->full_open_options)
>>>        {
>>> diff --git a/block/commit.c b/block/commit.c
>>> index e1814d9693..26db55d800 100644
>>> --- a/block/commit.c
>>> +++ b/block/commit.c
>>> @@ -234,7 +234,6 @@ static int coroutine_fn
>>> bdrv_commit_top_preadv(BlockDriverState *bs,
>>>      static void bdrv_commit_top_refresh_filename(BlockDriverState *bs,
>>> QDict *opts)
>>>    {
>>> -    bdrv_refresh_filename(bs->backing->bs);
>>>        pstrcpy(bs->exact_filename, sizeof(bs->exact_filename),
>>>                bs->backing->bs->filename);
>>>    }
>>> diff --git a/block/mirror.c b/block/mirror.c
>>> index 61bd9f3cf1..2f5ccae2b1 100644
>>> --- a/block/mirror.c
>>> +++ b/block/mirror.c
>>> @@ -1421,7 +1421,6 @@ static void
>>> bdrv_mirror_top_refresh_filename(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *opts)
>>>             * bdrv_set_backing_hd */
>>>            return;
>>>        }
>>> -    bdrv_refresh_filename(bs->backing->bs);
>>>        pstrcpy(bs->exact_filename, sizeof(bs->exact_filename),
>>>                bs->backing->bs->filename);
>>>    }
>>> diff --git a/block/quorum.c b/block/quorum.c
>>> index 9152da8c58..03388590f3 100644
>>> --- a/block/quorum.c
>>> +++ b/block/quorum.c
>>> @@ -1080,7 +1080,6 @@ static void
>>> quorum_refresh_filename(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *options)
>>>        int i;
>>>          for (i = 0; i < s->num_children; i++) {
>>> -        bdrv_refresh_filename(s->children[i]->bs);
>>>            if (!s->children[i]->bs->full_open_options) {
>>>                return;
>>>            }
>>>
>>
>> Should blklogwrites not also receive the same treatment?
> 
> Probably, but how could I have known before blklogwrites was in? :-)
> 

Sorry about that. I realized my mistake soon after sending my message. :)

My excuse is that the threaded view in my Thunderbird showed the series 
among new ones (due to a recent "ping" message in the thread), and I 
didn't immediately notice from the timestamps that the series itself had 
been sent much earlier.

Best regards,
Ari Sundholm
ari@tuxera.com