From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60398 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSBC7-0000Gk-Ew
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:24:15 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1PSBC3-0004aG-Ld
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:24:11 -0500
Received: from mail-bw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.214.45]:47307)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1PSBC3-0004Zh-GM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:24:07 -0500
Received: by bwz16 with SMTP id 16so6801857bwz.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 08:24:06 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D0648AE.2060008@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:24:14 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20101125135657.GA2814@lst.de>
	<20101201153504.GA6056@lst.de>	<20101201153514.GA6310@lst.de>
	<4CF78D1D.3060107@redhat.com>	<20101210133843.GA28846@lst.de>
	<4D0644BF.3020701@redhat.com> <20101213161547.GA6498@lst.de>
In-Reply-To: <20101213161547.GA6498@lst.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/5] block: add discard support
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: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 12/13/2010 05:15 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 05:07:27PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 12/10/2010 02:38 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> if it's smaller than the block size we'll zero out the remainder of
>>> the block.
>>
>> I think it should fail at VM startup time, or even better do nothing at all.
>
> What should fail?

Nothing -- you wrote "if it's smaller than the block size we'll zero out 
the remainder of the block" which I interpreted the wrong way, i.e. as 
"XFS will round up the size to the remainder of the block and zero that 
part out as well".

Thanks for the clarification.

Paolo