|
From: | Eric Blake |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH v11 2/2] docs: qcow2: introduce compression type feature |
Date: | Thu, 6 Feb 2020 08:08:51 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 |
On 2/6/20 6:38 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
I'm OK with it too, as well as I'm OK with the stricter variant, when we don't allow incompatible images with zlib set. I don't see any serious difference. But I need this to land somehow. Max likes stricter variant and he is maintainer of qcow2.. Max, will you merge it as is, or did you change your mind, or should we ask Kevin for his opinion?I’m currently preparing a pull request (without this series), but after that I’m planning to merge the stricter variant. As far as I’ve seen, the argument for making it less strict was still accompanied by “Sure, nobody would set this flag for zlib-compressed images because that doesn’t make sense”. So if nobody would do that, we might as well just forbid it and thus ensure that everyone indeed does the sensible thing.
Fair enough; I'm happy to live with your decision as maintainer's prerogative.
I _do_ hope that the actual implementation series gets merged soon, though, and that as part of that series, you remember to tweak the optional 'Feature Name' extension header to name the new incompatible bit introduced in this patch. And there's the simultaneous patches from my qcow2 autoclear-all-zeroes bit that touch the same files, so we may have some rebasing fun ahead of us...
-- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |