On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 11:19:49AM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Prior to 1143ec5ebf4 it was OK to qemu_iovec_from_buf() from aligned-up
> buffer to original qiov, as qemu_iovec_from_buf() will stop at qiov end
> anyway.
>
> But after 1143ec5ebf4 we assume that bdrv_co_do_copy_on_re
13.03.2020 2:09, John Snow wrote:
On 3/12/20 4:19 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
Prior to 1143ec5ebf4 it was OK to qemu_iovec_from_buf() from aligned-up
buffer to original qiov, as qemu_iovec_from_buf() will stop at qiov end
anyway.
But after 1143ec5ebf4 we assume that bdrv_co_do_cop
On 3/12/20 4:19 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Prior to 1143ec5ebf4 it was OK to qemu_iovec_from_buf() from aligned-up
> buffer to original qiov, as qemu_iovec_from_buf() will stop at qiov end
> anyway.
>
> But after 1143ec5ebf4 we assume that bdrv_co_do_copy_on_readv works on
> part
Prior to 1143ec5ebf4 it was OK to qemu_iovec_from_buf() from aligned-up
buffer to original qiov, as qemu_iovec_from_buf() will stop at qiov end
anyway.
But after 1143ec5ebf4 we assume that bdrv_co_do_copy_on_readv works on
part of original qiov, defined by qiov_offset and bytes. So we must not
tou
14.03.2019 13:14, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> It's not safe to treat bdrv_is_allocated error as unallocated: if we
> mistake we may rewrite guest data.
... with same data, which is not so bad.
So, it's ok, I'm wrong, drop it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
> ---
>
It's not safe to treat bdrv_is_allocated error as unallocated: if we
mistake we may rewrite guest data.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
---
block/io.c | 12 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/io.c b/block/io.c
index 2ba603c7bc..dccad64d46
