Re: [PATCH v8 08/11] parallels: Move check of leaks to a separate function

[Hanna Czenczek <hreitz@redhat.com>]

On 15.01.23 16:58, Alexander Ivanov wrote:
> We will add more and more checks so we need a better code structure
> in parallels_co_check. Let each check performs in a separate loop
> in a separate helper.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Ivanov <alexander.ivanov@virtuozzo.com>
> Reviewed-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@openvz.org>
> ---
>   block/parallels.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/parallels.c b/block/parallels.c
> index 3d06623355..5db099b1dd 100644
> --- a/block/parallels.c
> +++ b/block/parallels.c
> @@ -475,14 +475,14 @@ static int parallels_check_outside_image(BlockDriverState *bs,
>       return 0;
>   }
>   
> -static int coroutine_fn parallels_co_check(BlockDriverState *bs,
> -                                           BdrvCheckResult *res,
> -                                           BdrvCheckMode fix)
> +static int parallels_check_leak(BlockDriverState *bs,
> +                                BdrvCheckResult *res,
> +                                BdrvCheckMode fix)
>   {
>       BDRVParallelsState *s = bs->opaque;
> -    int64_t size, prev_off, high_off;
> -    int ret;
> +    int64_t size, off, high_off, count;
>       uint32_t i;
> +    int ret;
>   
>       size = bdrv_getlength(bs->file->bs);
>       if (size < 0) {
> @@ -490,41 +490,16 @@ static int coroutine_fn parallels_co_check(BlockDriverState *bs,
>           return size;
>       }
>   
> -    qemu_co_mutex_lock(&s->lock);
> -
> -    parallels_check_unclean(bs, res, fix);
> -
> -    ret = parallels_check_outside_image(bs, res, fix);
> -    if (ret < 0) {
> -        goto out;
> -    }
> -
> -    res->bfi.total_clusters = s->bat_size;
> -    res->bfi.compressed_clusters = 0; /* compression is not supported */
> -
>       high_off = 0;
> -    prev_off = 0;
>       for (i = 0; i < s->bat_size; i++) {
> -        int64_t off = bat2sect(s, i) << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS;
> -        if (off == 0) {
> -            prev_off = 0;
> -            continue;
> -        }
> -
> -        res->bfi.allocated_clusters++;
> +        off = bat2sect(s, i) << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS;
>           if (off > high_off) {
>               high_off = off;
>           }
> -
> -        if (prev_off != 0 && (prev_off + s->cluster_size) != off) {
> -            res->bfi.fragmented_clusters++;
> -        }
> -        prev_off = off;
>       }
>   
>       res->image_end_offset = high_off + s->cluster_size;

Continuing the question from patch 7, why do we have separate ways to 
calculate s->data_end and res->image_end_offset now?  Would it be 
possible to just set `res->image_end = s->data_end` and thus drop the 
`for` loop from this function?

Hanna