On Wed 21 Feb 2018 05:59:58 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
> But as Berto has convinced me that an externally produced image can
> convince us to read up to 4M (even though we don't need that much to
> decompress),
A (harmless but funny) consequence of the way this works is that for any
valid
On 02/21/2018 11:39 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
See my commit message comment - we have other spots in the code base that
blindly g_malloc(2 * s->cluster_size).
Though is that a reason to do the same in new code or to phase out such
allocations whenever you touch them?
Touché.
And I intended
Am 21.02.2018 um 17:59 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> On 02/21/2018 10:51 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 20.02.2018 um 23:24 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> > > When reading a compressed image, we were allocating s->cluster_data
> > > to 32*cluster_size + 512 (possibly over 64 megabytes, for an image
>
On 02/21/2018 10:51 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 20.02.2018 um 23:24 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
When reading a compressed image, we were allocating s->cluster_data
to 32*cluster_size + 512 (possibly over 64 megabytes, for an image
with 2M clusters). Let's check out the history:
Much later, in
Am 20.02.2018 um 23:24 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> When reading a compressed image, we were allocating s->cluster_data
> to 32*cluster_size + 512 (possibly over 64 megabytes, for an image
> with 2M clusters). Let's check out the history:
>
> Back when qcow2 was first written, we used
On Wed 21 Feb 2018 04:00:54 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
>> - Solution b: the width of the 'compressed cluster size' field is
>>(cluster_bits - 8), that's (cluster_size / 256) sectors.
>
> Not true. It is (cluster_bits - 9) or (cluster_size / 512).
It's not, it's (cluster_bits - 8), the
On 02/21/2018 04:04 AM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Tue 20 Feb 2018 11:24:59 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
I was also preparing a patch to change this, but you arrived first :-)
So, it's time to cut back on the waste. A compressed cluster
will NEVER occupy more than an uncompressed cluster (okay,
On Tue 20 Feb 2018 11:24:59 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
I was also preparing a patch to change this, but you arrived first :-)
> So, it's time to cut back on the waste. A compressed cluster
> will NEVER occupy more than an uncompressed cluster (okay, gzip
> DOES document that because the
