From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43327)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1WXVsA-00028M-Bn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:15:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1WXVs3-00061h-QP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:15:30 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59468)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mreitz@redhat.com>) id 1WXVs3-0005zz-Ia
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:15:23 -0400
Message-ID: <5343F65B.4000609@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 15:15:07 +0200
From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1394232956-27852-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
	<1394232956-27852-8-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1394232956-27852-8-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 07/12] block/json: Add
	bdrv_co_get_block_status()
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, =?windows-1252?Q?Beno=EEt_Canet?= <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>

On 07.03.2014 23:55, Max Reitz wrote:
> Implement this function in the same way as raw_bsd does: Acknowledge
> that this is a passthrough driver (always return BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALI=
D
> and BDRV_BLOCK_DATA and derive the offset directly from the sector
> index) and add BDRV_BLOCK_RAW to the returned value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
> ---
>   block/json.c | 10 ++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

Ping =96 Beno=EEt is unsure of BDRV_BLOCK_RAW, therefore he elected not t=
o=20
give a reviewed-by for this patch.

The commit introducing BDRV_BLOCK_RAW=20
(92bc50a5ad7fbc9a0bd17240eaea5027a100ca79) is signed-off-by Peter,=20
reviewed-by Eric and signed-off-by Kevin (as the committer, I suppose).=20
Could anyone of you comment on this patch? The question is whether to=20
use BDRV_BLOCK_RAW or a recursive call to bdrv_get_block_status() here.=20
I mean, I could just replace the BDRV_BLOCK_RAW by a recursive call to=20
bdrv_get_block_status() and Beno=EEt would probably approve, but obviousl=
y=20
that would be cheating.


Max