From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ciUQ3-0007er-Q5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:09:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ciUQ2-0000yH-Qu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:09:27 -0500 References: <20170225170758.427066-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> <20170225170758.427066-9-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> From: John Snow Message-ID: <6ea27ac5-4a4e-80f7-397b-5bf45753bd21@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:09:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v16 08/22] qcow2: add bitmaps extension List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz , Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, famz@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, den@openvz.org On 02/27/2017 07:27 AM, Max Reitz wrote: > On 25.02.2017 18:07, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >> Add bitmap extension as specified in docs/specs/qcow2.txt. >> For now, just mirror extension header into Qcow2 state and check >> constraints. Also, calculate refcounts for qcow2 bitmaps, to not break >> qemu-img check. >> >> For now, disable image resize if it has bitmaps. It will be fixed later. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy >> --- >> block/Makefile.objs | 2 +- >> block/qcow2-bitmap.c | 439 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> block/qcow2-refcount.c | 6 + >> block/qcow2.c | 124 +++++++++++++- >> block/qcow2.h | 27 +++ >> 5 files changed, 592 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 block/qcow2-bitmap.c > > Somehow I have the feeling Kevin will find bad things in this patch, but > since I have already approved of all of the previous patches this one is > composed of and the changes on top of that look OK to me: > > Reviewed-by: Max Reitz > Pretty much the same sentiment as Max. The patchset is now organized a bit strangely, but I did R-B all the component pieces before, and the changes look fine. Reviewed-by: John Snow