On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:07:01AM +0100, Peter Lieven wrote:
> + /* If the output image is being created as a copy on write
> + * image, assume that sectors which are unallocated in the
> + * input image are present in both the output's and input's
> + * base images (no need to copy them). */
> + if (out_baseimg) {
> + if (!(ret & BDRV_BLOCK_DATA)) {
> + sector_num += n1;
> + continue;
> + }
> + /* The next 'n1' sectors are allocated in the input
> image.
> + * Copy only those as they may be followed by unallocated
> + * sectors. */
> + nb_sectors = n1;
> + }
> + /* avoid redundant callouts to get_block_status */
> + sector_num_next_status = sector_num + n1;
Can you explain when we need sector_num_next_status? It's not clear to
me from this patch when we will loop around already knowing that blocks
are allocated.
