Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] nbd/server: Nicer spelling of max BLOCK_STATUS reply length

13.05.2019 17:31, Eric Blake wrote: > On 5/13/19 5:03 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >> 10.05.2019 18:17, Eric Blake wrote: >>> Commit 3d068aff (3.0) introduced NBD_MAX_BITMAP_EXTENTS as a limit on >>> how large we would allow a reply to NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS to grow when >>> it is

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] nbd/server: Nicer spelling of max BLOCK_STATUS reply length

On 5/13/19 5:03 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > 10.05.2019 18:17, Eric Blake wrote: >> Commit 3d068aff (3.0) introduced NBD_MAX_BITMAP_EXTENTS as a limit on >> how large we would allow a reply to NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS to grow when >> it is visiting a qemu:dirty-bitmap: context. Later,

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] nbd/server: Nicer spelling of max BLOCK_STATUS reply length

10.05.2019 18:17, Eric Blake wrote: > Commit 3d068aff (3.0) introduced NBD_MAX_BITMAP_EXTENTS as a limit on > how large we would allow a reply to NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS to grow when > it is visiting a qemu:dirty-bitmap: context. Later, commit fb7afc79 > (3.1) reused the constant to limit

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] nbd/server: Nicer spelling of max BLOCK_STATUS reply length

Commit 3d068aff (3.0) introduced NBD_MAX_BITMAP_EXTENTS as a limit on how large we would allow a reply to NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS to grow when it is visiting a qemu:dirty-bitmap: context. Later, commit fb7afc79 (3.1) reused the constant to limit base:allocation context replies, although the name is