On 06/06/2016 08:59 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > This will allow copy on write operations where the overwritten part of > the cluster is not aligned to sector boundaries. > > Also rename the function because it has nothing to do with sectors any > more. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> > --- > block/qcow2-cluster.c | 54 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >
>
> if (bs->encrypted) {
> Error *err = NULL;
> + int sector = (cluster_offset + offset_in_cluster) >>
> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS;
Potentially the wrong type...
> assert(s->cipher);
> - if (qcow2_encrypt_sectors(s, start_sect + n_start,
> - iov.iov_base, iov.iov_base, n,
> - true, &err) < 0) {
> + assert((offset_in_cluster & BDRV_SECTOR_MASK) == 0);
Why is this one true? If I have a cluster of 4 sectors, why must
offset_in_cluster fall within only the first of those sectors? Are you
missing a ~, to instead be asserting that offset_in_cluster is
sector-aligned?
> + assert((bytes & ~BDRV_SECTOR_MASK) == 0);
This one looks correct, stating that the number of bytes to copy is a
sector multiple.
> + if (qcow2_encrypt_sectors(s, sector, iov.iov_base, iov.iov_base,
> + bytes >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, true, &err) <
> 0) {
...since encryption allows a 64-bit sector number for the case where the
image is larger than 2T.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
