Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 3/3] virstoragefile: Refactor virStorageFileResize

On 08/21/2014 06:51 PM, John Ferlan wrote: > >

> Hmm.. Perhaps a better way to do this would be to modify safezero() to > add a 4th boolean parameter "resize" and make the "safezero_mmap()" be > the false side and the check/call to SYS_fallocate() be the true side. > That way all the logic resides in virfile.c How about 'fallback_to_mmap' instead of resize? Or even simpler, we don't really need a different set of fallbacks for resize than the other uses. It seems the patch adding the preallocation to FileResize should have used safezero instead of reimplementing it. (I also wonder if there are systems without posix_fallocate, but having the syscall...) ACK to safezero implementation with all four methods: int safezero(int fd, off_t offset, off_t len) { if (virFileFdPosixFallocate(fd, offset, len) == 0) return 0; if (safezero_sys_fallocate(fd, offset, len) == 0) return 0; if (safezero_mmap(fd, offset, len) == 0) return 0; return safezero_slow(fd, offset, len); }