On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 01:23:28PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/08/2016 09:28 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
> >> My vote: do the same as we do for qcow2 or any other format. Make the
> >> size requested by the user as the size visible to the guest, and a
> >> fully-allocated image will take
On 02/08/2016 09:28 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> My vote: do the same as we do for qcow2 or any other format. Make the
>> size requested by the user as the size visible to the guest, and a
>> fully-allocated image will take more space on the host than what the
>> guest is using (that is, a fu
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:20:43PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/20/2016 10:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > Add a block driver that is capable of supporting any full disk
> > encryption format. This utilizes the previously added block
> > encryption code, and at this time supports the LUKS
On 01/20/2016 10:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Add a block driver that is capable of supporting any full disk
> encryption format. This utilizes the previously added block
> encryption code, and at this time supports the LUKS format.
>
> The driver code is capable of supporting any format sup
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 09:01:19PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 01/21 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 05:12:08PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > On Wed, 01/20 17:38, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > > +/* XXX Should we treat size as being total physical size
> > >
On Thu, 01/21 11:02, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 05:12:08PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 01/20 17:38, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > +/* XXX Should we treat size as being total physical size
> > > + * of the image (ie payload + encryption header), or just
> >
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 05:12:08PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Wed, 01/20 17:38, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > +/* XXX Should we treat size as being total physical size
> > + * of the image (ie payload + encryption header), or just
> > + * the logical size of the image (ie payload). If
On Wed, 01/20 17:38, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> +/* XXX Should we treat size as being total physical size
> + * of the image (ie payload + encryption header), or just
> + * the logical size of the image (ie payload). If the latter
> + * then we need to extend 'size' to include the
