[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] block/qcow2.c: rename qcow_ functions to qcow2_

[Jes Sorensen]

On 12/17/10 15:20, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>      offset = start_offset;
>>      while (offset < end_offset) {
>> @@ -88,13 +88,13 @@ static int qcow_read_extensions(BlockDriverState *bs, 
>> uint64_t start_offset,
>>  #ifdef DEBUG_EXT
>>          /* Sanity check */
>>          if (offset > s->cluster_size)
>> -            printf("qcow_handle_extension: suspicious offset %lu\n", 
>> offset);
>> +            printf("qcow_read_extension: suspicious offset %lu\n", offset);
> 
> It's now qcow2_read_extensions

Fixed

>> @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ static int qcow_is_allocated(BlockDriverState *bs, 
>> int64_t sector_num,
>>  
>>  /* handle reading after the end of the backing file */
>>  int qcow2_backing_read1(BlockDriverState *bs, QEMUIOVector *qiov,
>> -                  int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors)
>> +                        int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors)
> 
> This isn't related to renaming functions. Please don't include pure
> formatting changes, all they do is making git blame work worse.

No it makes the formatting consistent with the rest of the functions in
the file. I can leave it out, but then we just have more ugliness in the
file.

>> @@ -399,10 +399,11 @@ static void qcow_aio_read_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
>>      } else {
>>          if (s->crypt_method) {
>>              qcow2_encrypt_sectors(s, acb->sector_num,  acb->cluster_data,
>> -                acb->cluster_data, acb->cur_nr_sectors, 0, 
>> &s->aes_decrypt_key);
>> +                                  acb->cluster_data, acb->cur_nr_sectors,
>> +                                  0, &s->aes_decrypt_key);
> 
> Same here, plus the old version wasn't obviously indented wrong, but
> just not according to your personal style.

Sorry it's broken formatting. But sure, I'll put it back to being
unreadable.

> The following changes include more lines that need not be changed for
> the rename and just change the coding style (even though CODING_STYLE
> doesn't make a statement on this, so the old version isn't wrong).
> Please leave them out.

Actually that is in the patch, I did a pure search replace, no
formatting. But I've fixed it.

Jes