[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] hbitmap: drop meta bitmaps as they are unused

From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] hbitmap: drop meta bitmaps as they are unused
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 18:05:46 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1

On 20.01.20 17:20, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 20.01.2020 14:13, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 19.12.19 11:03, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <address@hidden>
>>> ---
>>>   include/qemu/hbitmap.h |  21 --------
>>>   tests/test-hbitmap.c   | 115 -----------------------------------------
>>>   util/hbitmap.c         |  16 ------
>>>   3 files changed, 152 deletions(-)
>> Er, hrm, well.
>> Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <address@hidden>
>> git log me the only commits that touched anything to the regard of
>> '*create_meta*' were the ones that introduced it and your commit that
>> dropped it.
>> Soo, er, well, okay.  Why did we introduce these again?  (I suppose I
>> should know since they have my S-o-b on them.  But I actually don’t.)
>> Max
> I'm a bit not follow what you mean. I can just note, that dirty-bitmap.c
> part of meta bitmaps was recently removed, and hbitmap.c part I forgot to
> remove...

Yes, but who used that dirty-bitmap.c interface?  As far as I can tell,

> Meta bitmaps were intended to control live migration of bitmaps and to
> implement something like partial sync of bitmaps (write to qcow2 only
> changed part of bitmap), but migration implemented in other way
> (postcopy) and the second thing was not implemented.

OK.  I was wondering why they were implemented without ever having been
used (as far as I can tell).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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