[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Denis V. Lunev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] docs: fix mistake in dirty bitmap feature description
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 13:29:03 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1

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?


reply via email to

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