Re: [PATCH] qcow2: Explicit mention of padding bytes

[Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy]

27.02.2020 17:45, Eric Blake wrote:
> Although we already covered the need for padding bytes with our
> changes in commit 3ae3fcfa, commit 66fcbca5 just added one byte and
> relied on the earlier text for implicitly covering 7 padding bytes.
> For consistency with other parts of the header, it does not hurt to be
> explicit that this version of the header is using padding bytes, and
> if we later add other extension fields, we can rework the allocation
> of those padding bytes to match those additions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
> ---
>   docs/interop/qcow2.txt | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/docs/interop/qcow2.txt b/docs/interop/qcow2.txt
> index 5597e244746e..193ac7c5c1af 100644
> --- a/docs/interop/qcow2.txt
> +++ b/docs/interop/qcow2.txt
> @@ -209,6 +209,8 @@ version 2.
>                       Available compression type values:
>                           0: zlib <https://www.zlib.net/>
>
> +          105 - m:  Zero padding to round up the header size to the next
> +                    multiple of 8.

Hmm. Strictly speaking, you defined it as one of additional fields. And by
this definition, we may start to check in qemu that these bytes are zero,
instead of ignoring them and keeping as is..

But may be it's just a nitpicking..


--
Best regards,
Vladimir