Am 09.08.2017 um 22:38 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> We already have a lot of bdrv_getlength() fixes in -rc2; so I think
> this is still okay for -rc3.
> v1 was here (with a typo'd subject line):
> Since v1:
> - patch 1: fix error message capitalization (Kevin, R-b kept)
> - fix locking bug in original patch 2 (Kevin)
> - split original patch 2 into two parts: signature update, and
> added error checking (Kevin)
> - check for unlikely integer overflow before bdrv_truncate (Jeff)
> 001/5: [FC] 'vpc: Check failure of bdrv_getlength()'
> 002/5:[down] 'qcow: Change signature of get_cluster_offset()'
> 003/5: [FC] 'qcow: Check failure of bdrv_getlength() and
> 004/5:[----] [--] 'qcow2: Drop debugging dump_refcounts()'
> 005/5:[----] [--] 'qcow2: Check failure of bdrv_getlength()'
Looks good to me, but as the bug is far from being critical, I'd rather
apply the more complex qcow1 patches only to block-next. The vpc and
qcow2 parts seems a lot less risky, so 2.10 should be okay for them.
What do you think?