On 07/27/2017 04:23 PM, John Snow wrote:

>>>
>>> "Allocations may be considered either used or unused by the format
>>> driver interpreting those allocations. It is at the discretion of the
>>> format driver (e.g. qcow2) which regions of its backing storage are
>>> considered in-use or not."
>>
>> So we are saying about "allocations". But unallocated data may be
>> used/unused too, so,
>> can we call unallocated areas "allocations"?
>>
> 
> You're right, "allocation" may imply something that is extant, but these
> are more like regions ...

Even 'extent' might have a connotation of something reserved; other
related words like 'block' are bad (a block of a block device?).

> 
> Uh;
> 
> "Regions" may be considered either used or unused?
> 
> or
> 
> "Regions of the underlying protocol file may be considered used or
> unused by the format driver interpreting these regions."

So this is one of the better variations I've seen, and works for me.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org