On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 06:38:14PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote: > On 11.10.18 12:58, Alberto Garcia wrote: > > This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the > > values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and > > QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but > > future encryption methods could have different requirements. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <be...@igalia.com> > > --- > > block/qcow2.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > This breaks non-LUKS encryption: > > $ ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret > --object secret,id=secret,data=foo foo.qcow2 64M > Formatting 'foo.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=67108864 encryption=on > encrypt.key-secret=secret cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off > refcount_bits=16 > qemu-img: block.c:1248: bdrv_open_driver: Assertion > `is_power_of_2(bs->bl.request_alignment)' failed. > [1] 13589 abort (core dumped) ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o > encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret --objec > > (As seen in iotests 049, 087, 134, and 158.)
We failed to set sector size in the crypto backend when opening with the NO_IO flag set. I just sent a fix for that. Feel free to queue it as part of the block layer rather than waiting for my next crypto layer pull request. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
