On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 05:04:22PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 10:59:11AM +0200, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > > On 9/29/26 17:51, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > > > This email originated from an IP that might not be authorized by the > > > domain it was sent from. > > > Do not click links or open attachments unless it is an email you expected > > > to receive. > > > Backup and commit re-query the source block status for every task and > > > size a task by the copy buffer, so a long run of zeroes turns into a > > > crowd of small write-zeroes requests. This series reuses what the > > > up-front scan already learned and lets one write-zeroes task cover a > > > whole run. > > > > > > Backup of a 16G qcow2 image holding 1G of data, the rest never > > > allocated, sync=full to a raw target on ext4: > > > > > > tasks time > > > before 16384 1.6s > > > after 1088 1.0s > > > > > > Such an image is the normal case rather than a corner one: a guest with > > > discard enabled on a disk which is mostly free leaves exactly this > > > shape behind. > > > ping > > It looks like this series is fully reviewed; I also took a look at it > and didn't spot anything to add. I plan on queueing into a pull > request shortly.
After I posted this, Vladimir mentioned some possible changes. Should I do a pull request with this series as-is, or should I wait for a v4 and/or followup patches? -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. Virtualization: qemu.org | libguestfs.org
