On 11/11/2014 01:11 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
>>> + .compat = g_strdup("0.10"),
>>> + .refcount_width = s->refcount_bits,
>> Hmm - is it really worth displaying a constant? Since the 0.10 format
>> cannot change the width from 16, I'm not sure if it adds anything to the
>> output to display it. After all, there's other things we omit for the
>> old format when they cannot be altered (such as the state of a lazy
>> flag). On the other hand, if it makes your changes to later iotests
>> easier for tests that operate on both image formats, I'm not opposed
>> to it.
>
> Yes, I thought about not displaying it. But whereas "corrupt" or "lazy
> refcounts" simply do not make sense with compat=0.10 images (it's simply
> impossible), the refcount width does make sense. It's always 16 bits
> (I'm noticing myself how I keep swapping between "bit" and "bits", but I
> just can't help it) but I personally find it interesting enough to
> display. I'd be fine with dropping it from compat=0.10, though.
>
> But in retrospect, I'd rather make the other two flags always visible
> than now drop this entry. However, not displaying a bool if it's always
> false makes more sense to me than not displaying an integer because it's
> always constant.
> >> If you can make a strong argument for always outputting the constant >> width of 16 for 0.10 formats, then I can live with it, so: > > You decide whether it's strong enough. :-) > > My main argument is "If a bool is not displayed one can assume it to be > false; if an integer is not displayed which naturally cannot be 0, I > will have no idea what it would be, even if it's constant for that image > version". Sounds fairly convincing :) Add a paragraph like that to the commit message, and I'm sold! > >> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> So looks like you get to keep this. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
