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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 3B8B1C11F67 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 15:56:06 +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 DA7AA61DBF for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 15:56:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DA7AA61DBF 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]:48320 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lyG5k-0004vQ-Pe for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:56:04 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48564) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lyG3K-0002Y6-UG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:53:34 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:25744) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lyG3H-0005Gs-Lv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:53:34 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1624982010; 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; bh=v8oNRkYe4MAbyx1yOdxk2Jyu/d+WOA8EBQ0toKZVW3M=; b=OuTQvxO7IR8N81FqKASD0YzK3QbUoPAs7Dt3Yg7+/H7OstCEIoo+B53qPPQEL2Jef6Ls/B GpuC2pZXCnYM4V2ofKVg17W0vlEySE6B1Puy6Q9hXcn6w4WXg9rcsRh+RQwR/chwIHF4WF foP02UffkkUkuM9FGehJezVOMMJjK0k= Received: from mail-oo1-f69.google.com (mail-oo1-f69.google.com [209.85.161.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-16-thAcmPBsMxGs5hXNhlCdSg-1; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:53:29 -0400 X-MC-Unique: thAcmPBsMxGs5hXNhlCdSg-1 Received: by mail-oo1-f69.google.com with SMTP id r26-20020a4acb1a0000b029024c388a4835so10220276ooq.7 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 08:53:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=v8oNRkYe4MAbyx1yOdxk2Jyu/d+WOA8EBQ0toKZVW3M=; b=PfEC/ntOurXH+MAdK7FdwVc3cKE3EFJzQKfTJltvpKBUAdufre2wzKmctp1xRjKjsI a4gUt+qDZ7HMe2R5z1/pda5y4rTjq4TVxPlKGatiKY9qyM95w8+6RX5TIAyN9OIPydb1 FR5/jQwjW4ewEOrtxFZa8snypzKxn9tUVoJhuq9Q2sF4Txm9I00cTV7ioIGnL4bQHBoI nyH4QHTiWSCRS2qgjqQXOGJKJfkAdoqwsvhzLH7NwaA3VdAe/Nzz5NbYkxKOPKh7Myzk TJznRGVgKNjlTKzVSBgmElwxCD7B/2zOj7Co1WogMaXS7yrBluUJaZx7NE6wO14CiRL8 21Mg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533QIRlHH6yxmp/hZMDibadyFAjWN8pLEtI9KL3swqUcyhxYXzn9 1DbOFgzoLw79BAiO3OqwLpt4j02XmK9Rs+HRg4lDsPz0XeE7Vyc2jXqarXdavCeIPFodXS8KIAF gd28P2dsBKPesY6X6ozRge1vqtvmYZO4= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5b07:: with SMTP id p7mr22632756oib.118.1624982008904; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 08:53:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzQ7N/tKQwknZ3igbyfikVi0CKufZPzrH/qpvPZvyhkdGMqXGEfPITOCN35wcowkwoBitjDRO34kKmFHEG1Z+g= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5b07:: with SMTP id p7mr22632742oib.118.1624982008659; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 08:53:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210611140157.1366738-1-eblake@redhat.com> <20210611190316.1424729-1-eblake@redhat.com> <20210628174216.25ybfzmtbiymgd6s@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Nir Soffer Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:53:12 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/1] qemu-img: Add "backing":true to unallocated map segments To: Kevin Wolf Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=nsoffer@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=nsoffer@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -31 X-Spam_score: -3.2 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.435, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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 , "open list:Block layer core" , Markus Armbruster , QEMU Developers , Max Reitz , Eric Blake Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 5:40 PM Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Am 29.06.2021 um 09:23 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben: > > 28.06.2021 20:42, Eric Blake wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 06:04:19PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > > > This is fine, but it means that this flag will present in all ranges, > > > > > instead of only in unallocated ranges (what this patch is doing). > > > > > > > > An argument for always having the flag would be that it's probably > > > > useful for a tool to know whether a given block is actually absent or > > > > whether it's just running an old qemu-img. > > > > > > > > If we didn't care about this, I would still define the actual value, but > > > > also document a default. > > > > > > So to summarize, it looks like my v3 will have the best chance of > > > approval if I go with always outputting the new field (instead of only > > > on one of its two boolean values), and put it at the end of the JSON > > > output. Since the "present" key is always present, it does not need to be at the end. > > > It also looks like we have consensus on spelling the new > > > field "present":true for data found in the backing chain, and > > > "present":false for places where we would defer to another file if a > > > backing file is later added. > > > > > > > I didn't follow the discussion carefully, but that sounds good to me. > > To me, too. > > > What's the decision about patch 1? > > I think we won't need patch 1 (and the potential backwards compatibility > problems it would introduce) when we have this one. Yes, looks good and patch 1 is not needed. Nir