From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LfifD-0001hn-HJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:37:07 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LfifB-0001hG-6I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:37:06 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54370 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LfifB-0001hD-0p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:37:05 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f173.google.com ([209.85.219.173]:53875) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LfifA-0007kO-Je for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:37:04 -0500 Received: by ewy21 with SMTP id 21so254670ewy.34 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 14:37:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090211164814.GA7161@shareable.org> References: <20090211070049.GA27821@shareable.org> <4992A108.8070304@suse.de> <20090211114126.GC31997@shareable.org> <4992C77D.4030104@suse.de> <20090211164814.GA7161@shareable.org> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 23:37:02 +0100 Message-ID: <5b31733c0903061437i1b90568aj312af652fb226341@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qcow2 corruption observed, fixed by reverting old change From: Filip Navara Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=0016364c74b776ef8504647aecf3 Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Laurent Vivier , Kevin Wolf , kvm-devel --0016364c74b776ef8504647aecf3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Kevin Wolf wrote: >> Besides reviewing the code over and over again, I think the only real >> chance is that you can get a non-productive copy of your image and add >> some debug code so that we can see at least which code path is causing >> problems. > > I have a copy of my image to reproduce the bug, so I can test patches > including diagnostic patches. =A0That's what I did to narrow it down. Let's see. I have looked at the change in revision 5006 back and forth and this is the only bug that I can see... Does the patch help any? Best regards, Filip Navara --0016364c74b776ef8504647aecf3 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="block-qcow2.diff" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="block-qcow2.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Attachment-Id: f_frzg51qr0 SW5kZXg6IGJsb2NrLXFjb3cyLmMNCj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCi0tLSBibG9jay1xY293Mi5jCShyZXZp c2lvbiA2NzI5KQ0KKysrIGJsb2NrLXFjb3cyLmMJKHdvcmtpbmcgY29weSkNCkBAIC02MjEsNyAr NjIxLDcgQEANCiAgICAgaWYgKCFvZmZzZXQpCiAgICAgICAgIHJldHVybiAwOwogCi0gICAgZm9y IChpID0gc3RhcnQ7IGkgPCBzdGFydCArIG5iX2NsdXN0ZXJzOyBpKyspCisgICAgZm9yIChpID0g c3RhcnQ7IGkgPCBzdGFydCArIG5iX2NsdXN0ZXJzICYmIGkgPCBzLT5sMl9zaXplOyBpKyspCiAg ICAgICAgIGlmIChvZmZzZXQgKyBpICogY2x1c3Rlcl9zaXplICE9IChiZTY0X3RvX2NwdShsMl90 YWJsZVtpXSkgJiB+bWFzaykpCiAgICAgICAgICAgICBicmVhazsKIApAQCAtNjMyLDcgKzYzMiw3 IEBADQogewogICAgIGludCBpID0gMDsKIAotICAgIHdoaWxlKG5iX2NsdXN0ZXJzLS0gJiYgbDJf dGFibGVbaV0gPT0gMCkKKyAgICB3aGlsZShuYl9jbHVzdGVycy0tICYmIGkgPCBzLT5sMl9zaXpl ICYmIGwyX3RhYmxlW2ldID09IDApCiAgICAgICAgIGkrKzsKIAogICAgIHJldHVybiBpOwo= --0016364c74b776ef8504647aecf3--