On 6/20/19 11:47 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 20.06.19 03:03, John Snow wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  util/hbitmap.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/util/hbitmap.c b/util/hbitmap.c
>> index 45d1725daf..0d6724b7bc 100644
>> --- a/util/hbitmap.c
>> +++ b/util/hbitmap.c
>> @@ -777,7 +777,17 @@ void hbitmap_truncate(HBitmap *hb, uint64_t size)
>>  
>>  bool hbitmap_can_merge(const HBitmap *a, const HBitmap *b)
>>  {
>> -    return (a->size == b->size) && (a->granularity == b->granularity);
>> +    return (a->size == b->size);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void hbitmap_sparse_merge(HBitmap *dst, const HBitmap *src)
>> +{
>> +    uint64_t offset = 0;
>> +    uint64_t count = src->orig_size;
>> +
>> +    while (hbitmap_next_dirty_area(src, &offset, &count)) {
>> +        hbitmap_set(dst, offset, count);
>> +    }
>>  }
>>  
>>  /**
>> @@ -804,6 +814,16 @@ bool hbitmap_merge(const HBitmap *a, const HBitmap *b, 
>> HBitmap *result)
>>          return true;
>>      }
>>  
>> +    if (a->size != b->size) {
> 
> Don’t you mean s/size/granularity/?
> 
> Right now, this is dead code, which leads me to asking for a test.
> (Well, no, I would’ve asked anyway.)
> 
> Max
> 

Ah, crud. Caught red-handed. Yes and Yes.

As to your later question: Can we use this for backup initialization?
Also yes; but it might be the case that we want the copy bitmap to
become a full-fledged "bdrv dirty bitmap" instead of an hbitmap, which
will actually make this easier and probably eliminate the need for the
"_take" or "_claim" function I added, too.

Reply via email to