qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH for-2.10 v2 0/5] More bdrv_getlength() fixes


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH for-2.10 v2 0/5] More bdrv_getlength() fixes
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 15:02:40 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)

Am 09.08.2017 um 22:38 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> We already have a lot of bdrv_getlength() fixes in -rc2; so I think
> this is still okay for -rc3.
> 
> v1 was here (with a typo'd subject line):
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-08/msg01226.html
> 
> Since v1:
> - patch 1: fix error message capitalization (Kevin, R-b kept)
> - fix locking bug in original patch 2 (Kevin)
> - split original patch 2 into two parts: signature update, and
> added error checking (Kevin)
> - check for unlikely integer overflow before bdrv_truncate (Jeff)
> 
> 001/5:[0002] [FC] 'vpc: Check failure of bdrv_getlength()'
> 002/5:[down] 'qcow: Change signature of get_cluster_offset()'
> 003/5:[0048] [FC] 'qcow: Check failure of bdrv_getlength() and 
> bdrv_truncate()'
> 004/5:[----] [--] 'qcow2: Drop debugging dump_refcounts()'
> 005/5:[----] [--] 'qcow2: Check failure of bdrv_getlength()'

Looks good to me, but as the bug is far from being critical, I'd rather
apply the more complex qcow1 patches only to block-next. The vpc and
qcow2 parts seems a lot less risky, so 2.10 should be okay for them.

What do you think?

Kevin



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]