On 3/26/20 8:28 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 26.03.2020 um 14:20 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
+++ b/block/file-posix.c
@@ -3513,6 +3513,8 @@ static BlockDriver bdrv_host_device = {
.bdrv_reopen_prepare = raw_reopen_prepare,
.bdrv_reopen_commit = raw_reopen_commit,
.bdrv_reopen_abort = raw_reopen_abort,
+ .bdrv_co_create_opts = bdrv_co_create_opts_simple,
+ .create_opts = &bdrv_create_opts_simple,
I'd drop the leading & for consistency with the rest of this struct
initializer.
This one isn't a function pointer, so I think the & is necessary.
Ah, right. Visual pattern-matching failed me, since I didn't read the
actual types in the .h file.
Hmm - is it possible to write the patch in such a way that .create_opts
can be left NULL when .bdrv_co_create_opts is bdrv_co_create_opts_simple?
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
--
sheepdog mailing list
sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org
https://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/sheepdog
