On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 02:04:16PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> +int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_copy_range_from_backing(BlockDriverState *bs,
> + BdrvChild *src, uint64_t
> src_offset,
> + BdrvChild *dst, uint64_t
> dst_offset,
> + uint64_t bytes,
> BdrvRequestFlags flags)
> +{
> + if (!src->bs) {
> + return -ENOMEDIUM;
> + }
> + return bdrv_co_copy_range_from(src->bs->backing, src_offset, dst,
> + dst_offset, bytes, flags);
> +}
> +
> +int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_copy_range_to_backing(BlockDriverState *bs,
> + BdrvChild *src, uint64_t
> src_offset,
> + BdrvChild *dst, uint64_t
> dst_offset,
> + uint64_t bytes,
> BdrvRequestFlags flags)
> +{
> + if (!dst->bs) {
> + return -ENOMEDIUM;
> + }
> + return bdrv_co_copy_range_to(src, src_offset, dst->bs->backing,
> + dst_offset, bytes, flags);
> +}If src->bs or dst->bs were NULL, then bdrv_co_copy_range() would have already crashed in bdrv_inc_in_flight(src/dst_bs). Should .bdrv_co_copy_range_to/from() implementations really check for ENOMEDIUM?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
