It has the similar issue with b1649fae49a8. Since the calculation
is repeated for a few times already, introduce a function so it can be
reused.
Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com>
---
block/vmdk.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/vmdk.c b/block/vmdk.c
index b66745d..3e4d84b 100644
--- a/block/vmdk.c
+++ b/block/vmdk.c
@@ -1248,6 +1248,17 @@ static VmdkExtent *find_extent(BDRVVmdkState *s,
return NULL;
}
+static inline uint64_t vmdk_find_index_in_cluster(VmdkExtent *extent,
+ int64_t sector_num)
+{
+ uint64_t index_in_cluster, extent_begin_sector, extent_relative_sector_num;
+
+ extent_begin_sector = extent->end_sector - extent->sectors;
+ extent_relative_sector_num = sector_num - extent_begin_sector;
+ index_in_cluster = extent_relative_sector_num % extent->cluster_sectors;
+ return index_in_cluster;
+}
+
static int64_t coroutine_fn vmdk_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors, int *pnum)
{
@@ -1285,7 +1296,7 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn
vmdk_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
break;
}
- index_in_cluster = sector_num % extent->cluster_sectors;
+ index_in_cluster = vmdk_find_index_in_cluster(extent, sector_num);
n = extent->cluster_sectors - index_in_cluster;
if (n > nb_sectors) {
n = nb_sectors;
--
2.4.2
