Am 25.05.2012 17:33, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> @@ -1205,9 +1206,31 @@ int qcow2_check_refcounts(BlockDriverState *bs,
>> BdrvCheckResult *res)
>>
>> refcount2 = refcount_table[i];
>> if (refcount1 != refcount2) {
>> +
>> + /* Check if we're allowed to fix the mismatch */
>> + int *num_fixed = NULL;
>> + if (refcount1 > refcount2 && (fix & BDRV_FIX_LEAKS)) {
>> + num_fixed = &res->leaks_fixed;
>> + } else if (refcount1 < refcount2 && (fix & BDRV_FIX_ERRORS)) {
>> + num_fixed = &res->corruptions_fixed;
>> + }
>> +
>> fprintf(stderr, "%s cluster %d refcount=%d reference=%d\n",
>> - refcount1 < refcount2 ? "ERROR" : "Leaked",
>> + num_fixed != NULL ? "Repairing" :
>> + refcount1 < refcount2 ? "ERROR" :
>> + "Leaked",
>> i, refcount1, refcount2);
>> +
>> + if (num_fixed) {
>> + ret = update_refcount(bs, i << s->cluster_bits, 1,
>> + refcount2 - refcount1);
>
> It would be nicer to use int64_t for i. I haven't checked but it
> makes me nervous to shift ints here.
Thanks, good catch. Fixed in block-next.
Kevin
