QEMU-Devel Archive mirror
 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).