On Thu 22 Feb 2018 04:59:21 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
> Our code was already checking that we did not attempt to
> allocate more clusters than what would fit in an INT64 (the
> physical maximimum if we can access a full off_t's worth of
> data). But this does not catch smaller limits enforced by
Our code was already checking that we did not attempt to
allocate more clusters than what would fit in an INT64 (the
physical maximimum if we can access a full off_t's worth of
data). But this does not catch smaller limits enforced by
various spots in the qcow2 image description: L1 and normal
