Re: [PATCH 1/1] docs: fix mistake in dirty bitmap feature description

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 01:29:03PM +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> On 2/3/21 2:08 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 2/2/21 4:50 PM, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> >> On 2/3/21 1:15 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> >>> On 1/28/21 11:21 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> >>>> 28.01.2021 20:13, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> >>>>> Original specification says that l1 table size if 64 * l1_size, which
> >>>>> is obviously wrong. The size of the l1 entry is 64 _bits_, not bytes.
> >>>>> Thus 64 is to be replaces with 8 as specification says about bytes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is also minor tweak, field name is renamed from l1 to l1_table,
> >>>>> which matches with the later text.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@openvz.org>
> >>>>> CC: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> >>>>> CC: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
> >>>>
> >>> I saw the subject "dirty bitmap", and assumed it would go through my
> >>> dirty bitmap tree.  In reality, it's unrelated to the dirty bitmap code.
> >>>  Would an improved subject line help?
> >> hmm. Actually this is about "how the dirty bitmaps are stored in the
> >> Parallels Image format". The section is called "dirty bitmap feature".
> >>
> >> What I can propose? :)
> >>
> >> "docs: fix mistake in Parallels Image "dirty bitmap" feature description"
> >>
> >> Will this work for you?
> > That feels a bit long; maybe just:
> >
> > docs: fix Parallels Image "dirty bitmap" section
> >
> >
> 
> looks great to me. Should I resend?

It's okay. I have merged it, updated the commit message, and added a
note about the original commit message. The final commit has a
 Message-id: header so it's easy to find the original email thread.

Thanks, applied to my block tree:
https://gitlab.com/stefanha/qemu/commits/block

Stefan

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature