Am 14.09.2015 um 07:54 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben:
> On Fri 11 Sep 2015 07:33:41 PM CEST, Max Reitz wrote:
>
> >>> So why do we need the new flag? Because "backing: ''" is ugly?
> >>
> >> I guess it's just because you're the only one who actually reads the
> >>
On 10.09.2015 15:39, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> If set to true, the image will be opened with the BDRV_O_NO_BACKING
> flag. This is useful for creating snapshots using images opened with
> blockdev-add, since they are not supposed to have a backing image
> before the operation.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On 09/10/2015 07:39 AM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> If set to true, the image will be opened with the BDRV_O_NO_BACKING
> flag. This is useful for creating snapshots using images opened with
> blockdev-add, since they are not supposed to have a backing image
> before the operation.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On 11.09.2015 19:28, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 11.09.2015 um 19:21 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
>> On 10.09.2015 15:39, Alberto Garcia wrote:
>>> If set to true, the image will be opened with the BDRV_O_NO_BACKING
>>> flag. This is useful for creating snapshots using images opened with
>>>
Am 11.09.2015 um 19:21 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> On 10.09.2015 15:39, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> > If set to true, the image will be opened with the BDRV_O_NO_BACKING
> > flag. This is useful for creating snapshots using images opened with
> > blockdev-add, since they are not supposed to have a
On 09/11/2015 11:28 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> But design-wise, would it make sense to support:
>
> "backing":null
Just read Max's response; it sounds like we already have "backing":""
(and don't need "backing":null) for what we want. So maybe we don't need
this patch after all.
--
Eric Blake
If set to true, the image will be opened with the BDRV_O_NO_BACKING
flag. This is useful for creating snapshots using images opened with
blockdev-add, since they are not supposed to have a backing image
before the operation.
Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia
---
block.c