From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57753) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3oHm-00082l-Fv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:19:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3oHg-0000TR-GX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:18:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2215) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3oHf-0000TI-Uh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:18:48 -0400 Message-ID: <51F679B0.9070602@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 16:18:24 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 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> <20130729141022.GJ10467@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130729141022.GJ10467@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Kevin Wolf Cc: pl@kamp.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com Il 29/07/2013 16:10, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: > 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? No, I don't think so. Paolo