02.07.2020 12:41, Max Reitz wrote:
As I've said before, it may be reasonable to ignore bitmaps not
referenced in the hash-table.
No problem with that. We just decided on this behavior when we
discussed the RFC.
Sorry for that. The reason for my changed opinion is a recent bug from
customers about bitmap migration.
No problem. (My original proposal was different still, where
non-specified mappings would default to the identity mapping.)
And, remembering, what my series "[PATCH v2 00/22] Fix error handling during bitmap
postcopy" is for, I have one more reason for non-strict behavior around bitmap
migration in general:
Bitmaps are migrating postcopy. We can't rollback in general, so we should
ignore any error during bitmaps migration, as it's non critical data, and we
must not break already running target due to some bitmap issue. Failed bitmap
migration should never be a problem, the worst consequence is necessity to
create a full backup instead of incremental.