On Wed 08 Aug 2018 09:10:49 AM CEST, Leonid Bloch wrote: > The caches are now recalculated upon image resizing. This is done > because the new default behavior of assigning a sufficient L2 cache to > cover the entire image implies that the cache will still be sufficient > after an image resizing.
This is related to what I mentioned in the previous patch. The default behavior doesn't make the cache try to cover the entire image (or at least it doesn't *extend* the cache, which is what I understand from this paragraph). What it does is *reduce* the cache if the smaller version is enough for the entire image. > Signed-off-by: Leonid Bloch <lbl...@janustech.com> > --- > block/qcow2.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/block/qcow2.c b/block/qcow2.c > index 98cb96aaca..f60cb92169 100644 > --- a/block/qcow2.c > +++ b/block/qcow2.c > @@ -3639,6 +3639,8 @@ static int coroutine_fn > qcow2_co_truncate(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t offset, > } > } > > + bs->total_sectors = offset / BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE; > + > /* write updated header.size */ > offset = cpu_to_be64(offset); > ret = bdrv_pwrite_sync(bs->file, offsetof(QCowHeader, size), > @@ -3649,6 +3651,12 @@ static int coroutine_fn > qcow2_co_truncate(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t offset, > } > > s->l1_vm_state_index = new_l1_size; You could add an empty line here for readability. > + /* Update cache sizes */ > + QDict *options = qdict_clone_shallow(bs->options); C99 allows variable declarations in the middle of a block, but we're still doing it at the beginning (I don't know if there's a good reason for this?). Otherwise the patch looks good to me. Thanks! Berto
