Message ID | 1463503863-19009-2-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On 05/17/2016 10:51 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@openvz.org> > > We should check for (res & BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO) only. The situation when we > will have !(res & BDRV_BLOCK_DATA) and will not have BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO is > not possible for images with bdi.unallocated_blocks_are_zero == true. > > For those images where it's false, however, it can happen and we must > not consider the data zeroed then or we would corrupt the image. > > Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@openvz.org> > CC: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > --- > block/qcow2.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
diff --git a/block/qcow2.c b/block/qcow2.c index 62febfc..a6012dc 100644 --- a/block/qcow2.c +++ b/block/qcow2.c @@ -2412,7 +2412,7 @@ static bool is_zero_cluster(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t start) BlockDriverState *file; int64_t res = bdrv_get_block_status_above(bs, NULL, start, s->cluster_sectors, &nr, &file); - return res >= 0 && ((res & BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO) || !(res & BDRV_BLOCK_DATA)); + return res >= 0 && (res & BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO); } static bool is_zero_cluster_top_locked(BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t start)