qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-block] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block/dirty-bitmap: implement inconsist


From: John Snow
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block/dirty-bitmap: implement inconsistent bit
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 18:48:16 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0


On 2/18/19 3:37 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 2/18/19 12:13 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> 14.02.2019 2:36, John Snow wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <address@hidden>
>>> ---
>>>   block/dirty-bitmap.c         | 15 +++++++++++++
>>>   block/qcow2-bitmap.c         | 42 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>   blockdev.c                   | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   include/block/dirty-bitmap.h |  1 +
>>>   4 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
>>> +void bdrv_dirty_bitmap_add_inconsistent_hint(Error **errp)
>>> +{
>>> +    error_append_hint(errp, "Try block-dirty-bitmap-clear to mark this "
>>> +                      "bitmap consistent again, or 
>>> block-dirty-bitmap-remove "
>>> +                      "to delete it.");
>>
>> bitmaps created by libvirt (or somebody) are related to some checkpoint. And 
>> their name is
>> probably (Eric?) related to this checkpoint too. So, clear will never make 
>> them consistent..
>> Only clear :)
>>
>> So, I don't like idea of clearing in-use bitmaps.
> 
> It's always possible to delete a bitmap and then create a new one by the
> same name, to get the same effect of clearing an in-use bitmap. So let's
> start simple and declare that the only valid operation on an
> inconsistent bitmap is deletion.
> 

OK, from the viewpoint of checkpoints specifically, that's a convincing
argument against it for now.

I'll tighten this.



reply via email to

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