On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 05:41:13PM -0500, John Snow wrote: > Jeff, I think this ought to go through your tree, but I'll sign off on it. > > Fam: Do you agree? > > (Probably -next material, but I'm sending this email because I'm taking > it out of my review queue and I don't want it to get lost.) > > --js >
Yes, I can bring in through my tree, unless Fam prefers to have it - I'll pull it in via my block-next branch. Jeff > On 10/12/2017 09:53 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > > Hi all. Here is a continuation of my "new backup architecture" series, > > The very first part, but it is meaningful itself. > > > > v2: rebase on master > > 01: add test and fix bug > > 02: move commit about NONE mode to this patch, add John's r-b (hope, > > you are OK with this tiny change) > > 03: tiny refactor (John) > > 04: improve commit message, add John's r-b > > 05: add John's r-b > > > > Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy (5): > > hbitmap: add next_zero function > > backup: move from done_bitmap to copy_bitmap > > backup: init copy_bitmap from sync_bitmap for incremental > > backup: simplify non-dirty bits progress processing > > backup: use copy_bitmap in incremental backup > > > > include/block/dirty-bitmap.h | 1 + > > include/qemu/hbitmap.h | 8 +++ > > block/backup.c | 118 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > > block/dirty-bitmap.c | 5 ++ > > tests/test-hbitmap.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > util/hbitmap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++ > > 6 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > >