On 04/12/2017 07:36 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 04/12/2017 05:47 PM, John Snow wrote: >> >> >> On 04/12/2017 01:49 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >>> We had several functions that no one was using, and which used >>> sector-based interfaces. I'm trying to convert towards byte-based >>> interfaces, so it's easier to just drop the unused functions: >>> >>> bdrv_dirty_bitmap_size >>> bdrv_dirty_bitmap_get_meta >>> bdrv_dirty_bitmap_reset_meta >>> bdrv_dirty_bitmap_meta_granularity >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> include/block/dirty-bitmap.h | 8 -------- >>> block/dirty-bitmap.c | 34 ---------------------------------- >>> 2 files changed, 42 deletions(-) >>> > >> >> I think it's likely Vladimir is or at least was relying on some of these >> for his migration and persistence series. >> >> Might be nice to let him chime in to see how much of a hassle this is. > > Then let's add him in cc ;) >
Err... I can't just summon people by mentioning them? > I'm okay if these functions stay because they have a user, but it would > also be nice if they were properly byte-based (like everything else in > dirty-bitmap at the end of my series). So even if we remove them here, > we can revert the removal, and re-add them but with a sane interface. > OK, but I will offer to do the work in the interest of not slowing things down any further. Do you use any of these, Vladimir? --js
