On 07/10/2017 05:19 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/10/2017 04:09 PM, John Snow wrote:
On 07/03/2017 11:10 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
We are still using an internal hbitmap that tracks a size in sectors,
with the granularity scaled down accordingly, because it lets us
use a shortcut for our iterators which are currently sector-based.
But there's no reason we can't track the dirty bitmap size in bytes,
since it is (mostly) an internal-only variable (remember, the size
is how many bytes are covered by the bitmap, not how many bytes the
bitmap occupies). Furthermore, we're already reporting bytes for
bdrv_dirty_bitmap_granularity(); mixing bytes and sectors in our
return values is a recipe for confusion.
The only external caller in qcow2-bitmap.c is temporarily more verbose
(because it is still using sector-based math), but will later be
switched to track progress by bytes instead of sectors.
Use is_power_of_2() while at it, instead of open-coding that.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
@@ -305,8 +307,10 @@ BdrvDirtyBitmap
*bdrv_reclaim_dirty_bitmap(BlockDriverState *bs,
void bdrv_dirty_bitmap_truncate(BlockDriverState *bs)
{
BdrvDirtyBitmap *bitmap;
- uint64_t size = bdrv_nb_sectors(bs);
+ int64_t size = bdrv_getlength(bs);
+ assert(size >= 0);
+ size = DIV_ROUND_UP(size, BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE);
Do we need a TODO here as well, or are we going to track these in terms
of "sectors" permanently?
The rounding goes away in patch 17/17 when I flip the internals to
byte-based. If a TODO comment here (that goes away in patch 17) makes
review easier, I can add that.
Email confirmation is enough for me, personally.
--js
