Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> writes:
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> wrote:
>> Applied using the Coccinelle semantic patch
>> scripts/coccinelle/use_osdep.cocci
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
>> ---
>> migration/block.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/migration/block.c b/migration/block.c
>> index 9171f60028..498c72ad59 100644
>> --- a/migration/block.c
>> +++ b/migration/block.c
>> @@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ static int block_load(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque, int
>> version_id)
>> ret = bdrv_get_info(blk_bs(blk), &bdi);
>> if (ret == 0 && bdi.cluster_size > 0 &&
>> bdi.cluster_size <= BLOCK_SIZE &&
>> - BLOCK_SIZE % bdi.cluster_size == 0) {
>> + QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(BLOCK_SIZE, bdi.cluster_size)) {
>> cluster_size = bdi.cluster_size;
>> } else {
>> cluster_size = BLOCK_SIZE;
>
> Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com>
>
> Should I take this patch, or does it go through the block layer? Your
> call.
Given it is part of a set would it not make more sense going through
-trivial with the rest of them?
--
Alex Bennée
