Move supports_backing check of bdrv_reopen_parse_backing to called
(through bdrv_set_backing_noperm()) bdrv_set_file_or_backing_noperm()
function. The check applies to general case, so it's appropriate for
bdrv_set_file_or_backing_noperm().
We have to declare backing support for two test drivers, otherwise new
check fails.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-7-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
The logic around finding overlay here is not obvious. Actually it does
two simple things:
1. If new bs is already in backing chain, split from parent bs by
several implicit filters we are done, do nothing.
2. Otherwise, don't try to replace implicit filter.
Let's rewrite this in more obvious way.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-6-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
bdrv_set_backing_noperm() takes care of it (actual check is in
bdrv_set_file_or_backing_noperm()), so we don't need to check it here.
While being here, improve error message a bit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-5-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
We don't need this check: bdrv_set_backing_noperm() will do it anyway
(actually in bdrv_attach_child_common()).
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-4-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To be used for reopen in future commit.
Notes:
- It seems OK to update inherits_from if new bs is recursively inherits
from parent bs. Let's just not check for backing_chain_contains, to
support file child of non-filters.
- Simply check child->frozen instead of
bdrv_is_backing_chain_frozen(), as we really interested only in this
one child.
- Role determination of new child is a bit more complex: it remains
the same for backing child, it's obvious for filter driver. But for
non-filter file child let's for now restrict to only replacing
existing child (and keeping its role).
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-3-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To be used for reopen in future commit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210610120537.196183-2-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210610112618.127378-3-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
We have bdrv_replace_child() wrapper on bdrv_replace_child_noperm().
But bdrv_replace_child() doesn't update permissions. It's rather
strange, as normally it's expected that foo() should call foo_noperm()
and update permissions.
Let's rename and add comment.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210610112618.127378-2-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
When creating an image file with a backing file, we generally try to
open the backing file (unless -u was specified), mostly to verify that
it is there, but also to get the file size if none was specified for the
new image.
For neither of these things do we need data I/O, and so we can pass
BDRV_O_NO_IO when opening the backing file. This allows us to open even
encrypted backing images without requiring the user to provide a secret.
This makes the -u switch in iotests 189 and 198 unnecessary (and the
$size parameter), so drop it, because this way we get regression tests
for this patch here.
Fixes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/441
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210622140030.212487-1-mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Commit 3108a15cf (block: introduce bdrv_drop_filter()) introduced
uninitialized variable to_cow_parent in bdrv_replace_node_common
function that is used only when detach_subchain is true. It is used in
two places. First if block properly initialize the variable and second
block use it.
However, compiler may treat these two blocks as two independent cases so
it thinks first block can fail test and second one pass (although both
use same condition). This cause warning that variable can be
uninitialized in second block.
The warning was observed with GCC 8.4.1 and 11.0.1.
To prevent this warning, initialize the variable with NULL.
Signed-off-by: Miroslav Rezanina <mrezanin@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1162368493.17178530.1620201543649.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Some BSD platforms do not have this header.
Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Joelle van Dyne <j@getutm.app>
Message-Id: <20210315180341.31638-3-j@getutm.app>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Now permissions are updated as follows:
1. do graph modifications ignoring permissions
2. do permission update
(of course, we rollback [1] if [2] fails)
So, on stage [2] we can't say which users are "old" and which are
"new" and exist only since [1]. And current error message is a bit
outdated. Let's improve it, to make everything clean.
While being here, add also a comment and some good assertions.
iotests 283, 307, qsd-jobs outputs are updated.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210601075218.79249-7-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
All child classes have this callback. So, drop unreachable code.
Still add an assertion to bdrv_attach_child_common(), to early detect
bad classes.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210601075218.79249-6-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
We have different types of parents: block nodes, block backends and
jobs. So, it makes sense to specify type together with name.
Next, this handler us used to compose an error message about permission
conflict. And permission conflict occurs in a specific place of block
graph. We shouldn't report name of parent device (as it refers another
place in block graph), but exactly and only the name of the node. So,
use bdrv_get_node_name() directly.
iotest 283 output is updated.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
Message-Id: <20210601075218.79249-4-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
The logic around **child is not obvious: this reference is used not
only to return resulting child, but also to rollback NULL value on
transaction abort.
So, let's add documentation and some assertions.
While being here, drop extra declaration of bdrv_attach_child_noperm().
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210601075218.79249-2-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
This variable is just a cache for !(bs->open_flags & BDRV_O_RDWR),
which we have to synchronize everywhere. Let's just drop it and
consistently use bdrv_is_read_only().
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210527154056.70294-3-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
It's better to use accessor function instead of bs->read_only directly.
In some places use bdrv_is_writable() instead of
checking both BDRV_O_RDWR set and BDRV_O_INACTIVE not set.
In bdrv_open_common() it's a bit strange to add one more variable, but
we are going to drop bs->read_only in the next patch, so new ro local
variable substitutes it here.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210527154056.70294-2-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Like other error paths, this one needs to call tran_finalize() and clean
up the BlockReopenQueue, too.
Fixes: CID 1452772
Fixes: 72373e40fb
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210503110555.24001-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
The error path needs to call tran_finalize(), too.
Fixes: CID 1452773
Fixes: 548a74c0db
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210503110555.24001-2-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
They are unused now.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210506090621.11848-3-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Stop including sysemu/sysemu.h in files that don't need it.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210416171314.2074665-2-thuth@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>
Now, bdrv_node_check_perm() is called only with fresh cumulative
permissions, so its actually "refresh_perm".
Move permission calculation to the function. Also, drop unreachable
error message and rewrite the remaining one to be more generic (as now
we don't know which node is added and which was already here).
Add also Virtuozzo copyright, as big work is done at this point.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-37-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
We don't have bdrv_replace_child(), so it's time for
bdrv_replace_child_safe() to take its place.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-36-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Old interfaces dropped, nobody directly calls
bdrv_child_set_perm_abort() and bdrv_child_set_perm_commit(), so we can
use personal state structure for the action and stop exploiting
BdrvChild structure. Also, drop "_safe" suffix which is redundant now.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-35-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
bdrv_replace_child() has only one caller, the second argument is
unused. Inline it now. This triggers deletion of some more unused
interfaces.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-34-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
bdrv_check_perm_common() has only one caller, so no more sense in
"common".
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-33-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-32-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Move bdrv_reopen_multiple to new paradigm of permission update:
first update graph relations, then do refresh the permissions.
We have to modify reopen process in file-posix driver: with new scheme
we don't have prepared permissions in raw_reopen_prepare(), so we
should reconfigure fd in raw_check_perm(). Still this seems more native
and simple anyway.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-31-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
During reopen we may add backing bs from other aio context, which may
lead to changing original context of top bs.
We are going to move graph modification to prepare stage. So, it will
be possible that bdrv_flush() in bdrv_reopen_prepare called on bs in
non-original aio context, which we didn't aquire which leads to crash.
To avoid this problem move bdrv_flush() to be a separate reopen stage
before bdrv_reopen_prepare().
This doesn't seem correct to acquire only one aio context and not all
contexts participating in reopen. But it's not obvious how to do it
correctly, keeping in mind:
1. rules of bdrv_set_aio_context_ignore() that requires new_context
lock not being held
2. possible deadlocks because of holding all (or several?) AioContext
locks
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-30-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Split out no-perm part of bdrv_set_backing_hd() as a separate
transaction action. Note the in case of existing BdrvChild we reuse it,
not recreate, just to do less actions.
We don't need to create extra reference to backing_hd as we don't lose
it in bdrv_attach_child().
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-29-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To be used in further commit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-28-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To be used in the further commit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-27-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
This argument is always NULL. Drop it.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-26-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Using bdrv_replace_node() for removing filter is not good enough: it
keeps child reference of the filter, which may conflict with original
top node during permission update.
Instead let's create new interface, which will do all graph
modifications first and then update permissions.
Let's modify bdrv_replace_node_common(), allowing it additionally drop
backing chain child link pointing to new node. This is quite
appropriate for bdrv_drop_intermediate() and makes possible to add
new bdrv_drop_filter() as a simple wrapper.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-24-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-23-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
bdrv_append is not very good for inserting filters: it does extra
permission update as part of bdrv_set_backing_hd(). During this update
filter may conflict with other parents of top_bs.
Instead, let's first do all graph modifications and after it update
permissions.
append-greedy-filter test-case in test-bdrv-graph-mod is now works, so
move it out of debug option.
Note: bdrv_append() is still only works for backing-child based
filters. It's something to improve later.
Note2: we use the fact that bdrv_append() is used to append new nodes,
without backing child, so we don't need frozen check and inherits_from
logic from bdrv_set_backing_hd().
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-22-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Split part of bdrv_replace_node_common() to be used separately.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-21-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Split no-perm part of bdrv_attach_child as separate transaction action.
It will be used in later commits.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-20-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Split out no-perm part of bdrv_root_attach_child() into separate
transaction action. bdrv_root_attach_child() now moves to new
permission update paradigm: first update graph relations then update
permissions.
qsd-jobs test output updated. Seems now permission update goes in
another order. Still, the test comment say that we only want to check
that command doesn't crash, and it's still so.
Error message is a bit misleading as it looks like job was added first.
But actually in new paradigm of graph update we can't distinguish such
things. We should update the error message, but let's not do it now.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-19-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
inore_children thing doesn't help to track all propagated permissions
of children we want to ignore. The simplest way to correctly update
permissions is update graph first and then do permission update. In
this case we just referesh permissions for the whole subgraph (in
topological-sort defined order) and everything is correctly calculated
automatically without any ignore_children.
So, refactor bdrv_replace_node_common to first do graph update and then
refresh the permissions.
Test test_parallel_exclusive_write() now pass, so move it out of
debugging "if".
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-18-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To be used in the following commit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-17-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Add new interface, allowing use of existing node list. It will be used
to fix bdrv_replace_node() in the further commit.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-16-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Refactor calling driver callbacks to a separate transaction action to
be used later.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-15-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Rewrite bdrv_check_perm(), bdrv_abort_perm_update() and bdrv_set_perm()
to update nodes in topological sort order instead of simple DFS. With
topologically sorted nodes, we update a node only when all its parents
already updated. With DFS it's not so.
Consider the following example:
A -+
| |
| v
| B
| |
v |
C<-+
A is parent for B and C, B is parent for C.
Obviously, to update permissions, we should go in order A B C, so, when
we update C, all parent permissions already updated. But with current
approach (simple recursion) we can update in sequence A C B C (C is
updated twice). On first update of C, we consider old B permissions, so
doing wrong thing. If it succeed, all is OK, on second C update we will
finish with correct graph. But if the wrong thing failed, we break the
whole process for no reason (it's possible that updated B permission
will be less strict, but we will never check it).
Also new approach gives a way to simultaneously and correctly update
several nodes, we just need to run bdrv_topological_dfs() several times
to add all nodes and their subtrees into one topologically sorted list
(next patch will update bdrv_replace_node() in this manner).
Test test_parallel_perm_update() is now passing, so move it out of
debugging "if".
We also need to support ignore_children in
bdrv_parent_perms_conflict()
For test 283 order of conflicting parents check is changed.
Note also that in bdrv_check_perm() we don't check for parents conflict
at root bs, as we may be in the middle of permission update in
bdrv_reopen_multiple(). bdrv_reopen_multiple() will be updated soon.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-14-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Each of them has only one caller. Open-coding simplifies further
pemission-update system changes.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-13-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
We are going to drop recursive bdrv_child_* functions, so stop use them
in bdrv_child_try_set_perm() as a first step.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-12-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Split out non-recursive parts, and refactor as block graph transaction
action.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-11-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Add additional check that node parents do not interfere with each
other. This should not hurt existing callers and allows in further
patch use bdrv_refresh_perms() to update a subtree of changed
BdrvChild (check that change is correct).
New check will substitute bdrv_check_update_perm() in following
permissions refactoring, so keep error messages the same to avoid
unit test result changes.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-10-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
These functions are called only from bdrv_reopen_multiple() in block.c.
No reason to publish them.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-8-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
