From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41324) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtzvP-0000n7-LZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:20:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtzvG-0001FQ-TA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:20:03 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53559) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtzvG-0001F9-FJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:19:54 -0500 Message-ID: <54773305.2090407@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 15:19:49 +0100 From: Max Reitz MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1416503198-17031-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com> <1416503198-17031-3-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com> <20141127134713.GA15586@stefanha-thinkpad.lan> In-Reply-To: <20141127134713.GA15586@stefanha-thinkpad.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 02/22] qcow2: Add refcount_width to format-specific info List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi On 2014-11-27 at 14:47, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 06:06:18PM +0100, Max Reitz wrote: >> Add the bit width of every refcount entry to the format-specific >> information. >> >> In contrast to lazy_refcounts and the corrupt flag, this should be >> always emitted, even for compat=0.10 although it does not support any >> refcount width other than 16 bits. This is because if a boolean is >> optional, one normally assumes it to be false when omitted; but if an >> integer is not specified, it is rather difficult to guess its value. >> >> This new field breaks some test outputs, fix them. >> >> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz >> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake >> --- >> block/qcow2.c | 4 +++- >> qapi/block-core.json | 5 ++++- >> tests/qemu-iotests/060.out | 1 + >> tests/qemu-iotests/065 | 23 +++++++++++++++-------- >> tests/qemu-iotests/067.out | 5 +++++ >> tests/qemu-iotests/082.out | 7 +++++++ >> tests/qemu-iotests/089.out | 2 ++ >> 7 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/block/qcow2.c b/block/qcow2.c >> index f57aff9..d70e927 100644 >> --- a/block/qcow2.c >> +++ b/block/qcow2.c >> @@ -2475,7 +2475,8 @@ static ImageInfoSpecific *qcow2_get_specific_info(BlockDriverState *bs) >> }; >> if (s->qcow_version == 2) { >> *spec_info->qcow2 = (ImageInfoSpecificQCow2){ >> - .compat = g_strdup("0.10"), >> + .compat = g_strdup("0.10"), >> + .refcount_width = s->refcount_bits, > Why call it "width" in ImageInfoSpecificQCow2 when the qcow2 code calls > it "bits"? IMO "bits" is clearer because it tells you the units, and > it's more consistent. Well, I'm fine with either. The spec calls it refcount_bits, too, but also says it's the "width". My main argument against "bits" would be that I'd have to look through the whole series and make sure I change it everywhere, and also drop Eric's R-b. *g* So, yes, I'm fine with changing it to refcount_bits. Max