qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] qcow2: Employ metadata overlap checks


From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] qcow2: Employ metadata overlap checks
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:41:24 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130805 Thunderbird/17.0.8

Am 27.08.2013 13:32, schrieb Kevin Wolf:
Am 26.08.2013 um 15:04 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
The pre-write overlap check function is now called before most of the
qcow2 writes (aborting it on collision or other error).

Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <address@hidden>
---
  block/qcow2-cache.c    | 17 +++++++++++++++++
  block/qcow2-cluster.c  | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
  block/qcow2-snapshot.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
  block/qcow2.c          | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
  4 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -368,6 +384,13 @@ static int coroutine_fn copy_sectors(BlockDriverState *bs,
                          &s->aes_encrypt_key);
      }
+ ret = qcow2_pre_write_overlap_check(bs, QCOW2_OL_DEFAULT,
+            ((cluster_offset >> 9) + n_start) << 9, n * BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE);
Looks a bit overcomplicated, I'd like something like this better:

cluster_offset + n_start * BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE
Yes, but this wouldn't correspond with the write call if (cluster_offset & ((1 << 9) - 1)) != 0. ;-)

Basically, I just wanted it to match exactly the write command.


+    if (ret) {
+        ret = (ret < 0) ? ret : -EIO;
I wonder whether the -EIO logic should be moved into
qcow2_pre_write_overlap_check(). Currently each single caller seems to
have this check.
Seems reasonable. I didn't want to prevent the caller from receiving information about the exact overlap, but that could be achieved through an optional result pointer as well, I think.


+        goto out;
+    }
+
      BLKDBG_EVENT(bs->file, BLKDBG_COW_WRITE);
      ret = bdrv_co_writev(bs->file, (cluster_offset >> 9) + n_start, n, &qiov);
      if (ret < 0) {
diff --git a/block/qcow2-snapshot.c b/block/qcow2-snapshot.c
index 0caac90..6f69ecc 100644
--- a/block/qcow2-snapshot.c
+++ b/block/qcow2-snapshot.c
@@ -189,6 +189,15 @@ static int qcow2_write_snapshots(BlockDriverState *bs)
          return ret;
      }
+ /* The snapshot list position has not yet been updated, so these clusters
+     * must indeed be completely free */
+    ret = qcow2_pre_write_overlap_check(bs, QCOW2_OL_DEFAULT,
+                                        offset, s->nb_snapshots * sizeof(h));
+    if (ret) {
+        return (ret < 0) ? ret : -EIO;
+    }
This doesn't check the full size. snapshots_size should have the right
value.
Yes, you're right.

Max



reply via email to

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