From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E16DC433DF for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB622063A for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:50:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="MRYjn6RG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EEB622063A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:40338 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8QMc-0000aV-9B for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:50:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41586) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8QLu-00088h-1O for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:50:14 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:32258) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8QLs-0003fw-9d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:50:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1597852211; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=nUmsalAnzI1XML5eaj+HO2B2SZzJl1fAMqi9DFj4cbA=; b=MRYjn6RGaGKZ4q/ifaDTjYDuL7l7L7DF291pTsPH/eb5pl9tZDctg5eGYUsYBFHl1vqX9i iooSSXRZRBhApVuMDDLGHd/wmOeTV/HK2DTk7PGvjCj9DBt3WswQ9e63tGgPnsyO1Wb9SA g+jikP+G7RcLJ3DKZofc9+7lqc6gh88= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-222-TOJTdGLxOOuOoq6_KuNKHQ-1; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:50:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: TOJTdGLxOOuOoq6_KuNKHQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B608186A568; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:50:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dresden.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-120.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.120]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01E9F5C1A3; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:50:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 27/47] blkverify: Use bdrv_sum_allocated_file_size() To: Kevin Wolf References: <20200625152215.941773-1-mreitz@redhat.com> <20200625152215.941773-28-mreitz@redhat.com> <20200819104644.GA10272@linux.fritz.box> From: Max Reitz Autocrypt: addr=mreitz@redhat.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFXOJlcBCADEyyhOTsoa/2ujoTRAJj4MKA21dkxxELVj3cuILpLTmtachWj7QW+TVG8U /PsMCFbpwsQR7oEy8eHHZwuGQsNpEtNC2G/L8Yka0BIBzv7dEgrPzIu+W3anZXQW4702+uES U29G8TP/NGfXRRHGlbBIH9KNUnOSUD2vRtpOLXkWsV5CN6vQFYgQfFvmp5ZpPeUe6xNplu8V mcTw8OSEDW/ZnxJc8TekCKZSpdzYoxfzjm7xGmZqB18VFwgJZlIibt1HE0EB4w5GsD7x5ekh awIe3RwoZgZDLQMdOitJ1tUc8aqaxvgA4tz6J6st8D8pS//m1gAoYJWGwwIVj1DjTYLtABEB AAG0HU1heCBSZWl0eiA8bXJlaXR6QHJlZGhhdC5jb20+iQFTBBMBCAA9AhsDBQkSzAMABQsJ CAcCBhUICQoLAgQWAgMBAh4BAheABQJVzie5FRhoa3A6Ly9rZXlzLmdudXBnLm5ldAAKCRD0 B9sAYdXPQDcIB/9uNkbYEex1rHKz3mr12uxYMwLOOFY9fstP5aoVJQ1nWQVB6m2cfKGdcRe1 2/nFaHSNAzT0NnKz2MjhZVmcrpyd2Gp2QyISCfb1FbT82GMtXFj1wiHmPb3CixYmWGQUUh+I AvUqsevLA+WihgBUyaJq/vuDVM1/K9Un+w+Tz5vpeMidlIsTYhcsMhn0L9wlCjoucljvbDy/ 8C9L2DUdgi3XTa0ORKeflUhdL4gucWoAMrKX2nmPjBMKLgU7WLBc8AtV+84b9OWFML6NEyo4 4cP7cM/07VlJK53pqNg5cHtnWwjHcbpGkQvx6RUx6F1My3y52vM24rNUA3+ligVEgPYBuQEN BFXOJlcBCADAmcVUNTWT6yLWQHvxZ0o47KCP8OcLqD+67T0RCe6d0LP8GsWtrJdeDIQk+T+F xO7DolQPS6iQ6Ak2/lJaPX8L0BkEAiMuLCKFU6Bn3lFOkrQeKp3u05wCSV1iKnhg0UPji9V2 W5eNfy8F4ZQHpeGUGy+liGXlxqkeRVhLyevUqfU0WgNqAJpfhHSGpBgihUupmyUg7lfUPeRM DzAN1pIqoFuxnN+BRHdAecpsLcbR8sQddXmDg9BpSKozO/JyBmaS1RlquI8HERQoe6EynJhd 64aICHDfj61rp+/0jTIcevxIIAzW70IadoS/y3DVIkuhncgDBvGbF3aBtjrJVP+5ABEBAAGJ ASUEGAEIAA8FAlXOJlcCGwwFCRLMAwAACgkQ9AfbAGHVz0CbFwf9F/PXxQR9i4N0iipISYjU sxVdjJOM2TMut+ZZcQ6NSMvhZ0ogQxJ+iEQ5OjnIputKvPVd5U7WRh+4lF1lB/NQGrGZQ1ic alkj6ocscQyFwfib+xIe9w8TG1CVGkII7+TbS5pXHRxZH1niaRpoi/hYtgzkuOPp35jJyqT/ /ELbqQTDAWcqtJhzxKLE/ugcOMK520dJDeb6x2xVES+S5LXby0D4juZlvUj+1fwZu+7Io5+B bkhSVPb/QdOVTpnz7zWNyNw+OONo1aBUKkhq2UIByYXgORPFnbfMY7QWHcjpBVw9MgC4tGeF R4bv+1nAMMxKmb5VvQCExr0eFhJUAHAhVg== Message-ID: <66b31c9c-1357-9761-bac9-2a13dbed4377@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 17:50:04 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200819104644.GA10272@linux.fritz.box> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=mreitz@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0.001 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rr3Myat0Ze4vvWePEhtby00bJ81s9Ci7A" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=mreitz@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/19 06:57:45 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --rr3Myat0Ze4vvWePEhtby00bJ81s9Ci7A Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8TjxcsRbzHbIeHa2ZGebzZgXUOK2eXYsO" --8TjxcsRbzHbIeHa2ZGebzZgXUOK2eXYsO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19.08.20 12:46, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 25.06.2020 um 17:21 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: >> blkverify is a filter, so bdrv_get_allocated_file_size()'s default >> implementation will return only the size of its filtered child. >> However, because both of its children are disk images, it makes more >> sense to sum both of their allocated sizes. >=20 > Hm, but so are the children of, say, backup-top. I don't think you're > suggesting that backup-top should add the sizes of both images, Can be argued either way. I lean on the side of that it should not, because: The backup is external. The job is copying data off. So it isn=E2=80=99t really directl= y data that serves qemu, which can be seen from the fact that it=E2=80=99s ne= ver read. Which is not the case for quorum and blkverify. Though one can argue that blkverify is different from quorum here in that it doesn=E2=80=99t rea= d data from the non-filtered child to serve a guest device, but just to verify it node-internally. > even > though the backup job is actively increasing the allocated size of the > non-primary node, much like blkverify. >=20 > So I believe returning only the allocated size of the primary child in > blkverify would be more consistent with what we do elsewhere. For me, blkverify is basically an archaic mode of quorum, and for quorum it=E2=80=99s clear that we should sum the sizes. Which is why I thought su= mming the sizes would be more consistent. But honestly, I just don=E2=80=99t care about blkverify whatsoever. I don= =E2=80=99t believe anyone actually cares about whether what blkverify returns for .bdrv_get_allocated_file_size() is consistent. I believe we could return 42 and nobody would bat an eyelash. (But that=E2=80=99s the curse of this series. I have to touch stuff that n= obody cares about, and then we have discussions on stuff nobody cares about.) So from that POV I=E2=80=99m happy to drop this patch if it means there=E2= =80=99s just one less opportunity to have a discussion on blkverify. Max --8TjxcsRbzHbIeHa2ZGebzZgXUOK2eXYsO-- --rr3Myat0Ze4vvWePEhtby00bJ81s9Ci7A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEkb62CjDbPohX0Rgp9AfbAGHVz0AFAl89SiwACgkQ9AfbAGHV z0BbJgf8D3msur3CC3Zb6j789B6scmh876F/KcexY/nclflfhPe7lSecjG/ybr4J UsPM02jT9KkItlWLUoaBC4/L3l7f8hDfMBynrgqWKrTjZaM92lx05LjJqUIL+tAb PMkQvhDsghCsdUwKp7N2fWG8Ya4wn1vScalNZ7Ae62mtZA+Uj71XKsef5ADHNo+n 0XTUFUnabtwmCvAUSqWR3oRkQdQUZhnm8hMVGAQu4cozy6GrNNukGx+ZVRjgwpW7 8YapmrzKnXH7FwN+cDjNBo45iMi2A3GM6XfT6n8KflVVLBD/Hnuxr2lPek6Aq4WR LH//GfWcurgTaAWaL7bVwJONZen4fQ== =Hf2T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rr3Myat0Ze4vvWePEhtby00bJ81s9Ci7A--