On 1/10/19 6:25 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > 10.01.2019 10:13, Eric Blake wrote: >> We only have one caller that wants to export a bitmap name, >> which it does right after creation of the export. But there is >> still a brief window of time where an NBD client could see the >> export but not the dirty bitmap, which a robust client would >> have to interpret as meaning the entire image should be treated >> as dirty. Better is to eliminate the window entirely, by >> inlining nbd_export_bitmap() into nbd_export_new(), and refusing >> to create the bitmap in the first place if the requested bitmap >> can't be located. >> >> We also no longer need logic for setting a different bitmap >> name compared to the bitmap being exported. >>
>> +++ b/blockdev-nbd.c >> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ void qmp_nbd_server_add(const char *device, bool >> has_name, const char *name, >> writable = false; >> } >> >> - exp = nbd_export_new(bs, 0, -1, name, NULL, >> + exp = nbd_export_new(bs, 0, -1, name, NULL, bitmap, > > bitmap is guaranteed to be NULL if has_bitmap is false? Or should we do > has_bitmap ? bitmap : NULL? We fixed our QAPI generators to guarantee that has_foo = false implies foo == NULL, several years ago. If you populate a QAPI struct by hand instead of via the generated visitors, you should use g_malloc0() to match the same guarantees. So I don't need the ?:. > > if yes or with fixed: > Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@virtuozzo.com> > > -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
