All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nir Soffer <nsoffer@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>,
	"open list:Block layer core" <qemu-block@nongnu.org>,
	Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/1] qemu-img: Add "backing":true to unallocated map segments
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 19:56:32 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMRbyyt5qsVan8dOF=HHvqqo92zwTBRucnfA_UEOOmRMqiyaAQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YNID9rbo+RdwklCf@redhat.com>

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 6:38 PM Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Am 11.06.2021 um 21:03 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> > To save the user from having to check 'qemu-img info --backing-chain'
> > or other followup command to determine which "depth":n goes beyond the
> > chain, add a boolean field "backing" that is set only for unallocated
> > portions of the disk.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Touches the same iotest output as 1/1.  If we decide that switching to
> > "depth":n+1 is too risky, and that the mere addition of "backing":true
> > while keeping "depth":n is good enough, then we'd have just one patch,
> > instead of this double churn.  Preferences?
>
> I think the additional flag is better because it's guaranteed to be
> backwards compatible, and because you don't need to know the number of
> layers to infer whether a cluster was allocated in the whole backing
> chain. And by exposing ALLOCATED we definitely give access to the whole
> information that exists in QEMU.
>
> However, to continue with the bike shedding: I won't insist on
> "allocated" even if that is what the flag is called internally and
> consistency is usually helpful, but "backing" is misleading, too,
> because intuitively it doesn't cover the top layer or standalone images
> without a backing file. How about something like "present"?

Looks hard to document:

# @present: if present and false, the range is not allocated within the
#           backing chain (since 6.1)

And is not consistent with "offset". It would work better as:

# @present: if present, the range is allocated within the backing
#           chain (since 6.1)

Or:

# @absent: if present, the range is not allocated within the backing
#           chain (since 6.1)

This is used by libnbd now:
https://github.com/libguestfs/libnbd/commit/1d01d2ac4f6443b160b7d81119d555e1aaedb56d

But I'm fine with "backing", It is consistent with BLK_BACKING_FILE,
meaning this area exposes data from a backing file (if one exists).

We use "backing" internally to be consistent with future qemu-img.



  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-22 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-11 14:01 [PATCH v2] qemu-img: Make unallocated part of backing chain obvious in map Eric Blake
2021-06-11 14:35 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2021-06-11 14:59   ` Eric Blake
2021-06-11 18:13     ` Nir Soffer
2021-06-11 19:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/1] qemu-img: Add "backing":true to unallocated map segments Eric Blake
2021-06-15  8:54   ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2021-06-15 13:09     ` Nir Soffer
2021-06-22 15:38   ` Kevin Wolf
2021-06-22 16:56     ` Nir Soffer [this message]
2021-06-23  8:57       ` Kevin Wolf
2021-06-23 13:58         ` Nir Soffer
2021-06-23 16:04           ` Kevin Wolf
2021-06-23 16:35             ` Nir Soffer
2021-06-28 17:42             ` Eric Blake
2021-06-29  7:23               ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2021-06-29 14:40                 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-06-29 15:53                   ` Nir Soffer
2021-06-22 17:51     ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2021-06-22 17:04   ` Nir Soffer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAMRbyyt5qsVan8dOF=HHvqqo92zwTBRucnfA_UEOOmRMqiyaAQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=nsoffer@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=vsementsov@virtuozzo.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.