On 01.08.2014 22:38, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/01/2014 02:18 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
+if (status_cb) {
+status_cb(bs, *visited_l1_entries << (s->l2_bits +
s->cluster_bits),
+ l1_entries << (s->l2_bits + s->cluster_bits));
Shifting is a multiplication so it k
On 08/01/2014 02:18 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
>>> +if (status_cb) {
>>> +status_cb(bs, *visited_l1_entries << (s->l2_bits +
>>> s->cluster_bits),
>>> + l1_entries << (s->l2_bits + s->cluster_bits));
>> Shifting is a multiplication so it keep proportionality inta
On 31.07.2014 10:06, Benoît Canet wrote:
The Saturday 26 Jul 2014 à 21:22:08 (+0200), Max Reitz wrote :
The only really time-consuming operation potentially performed by
qcow2_amend_options() is zero cluster expansion when downgrading qcow2
images from compat=1.1 to compat=0.10, so report status
The Saturday 26 Jul 2014 à 21:22:08 (+0200), Max Reitz wrote :
> The only really time-consuming operation potentially performed by
> qcow2_amend_options() is zero cluster expansion when downgrading qcow2
> images from compat=1.1 to compat=0.10, so report status of that
> operation and that operatio
On 07/26/2014 01:22 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
> The only really time-consuming operation potentially performed by
> qcow2_amend_options() is zero cluster expansion when downgrading qcow2
> images from compat=1.1 to compat=0.10, so report status of that
> operation and that operation only through the sta
The only really time-consuming operation potentially performed by
qcow2_amend_options() is zero cluster expansion when downgrading qcow2
images from compat=1.1 to compat=0.10, so report status of that
operation and that operation only through the status CB.
For this, approximate the progress as th
