search for: test_layers_plugin_can_zero

...X_LANG_C test-layers-plugin.c:137:10: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in test-layers-plugin.c: At top level: test-layers-plugin.c:197:4: error: ‘struct nbdkit_plugin’ has no member named ‘can_zero’; did you mean ‘can_trim’? .can_zero = test_layers_plugin_can_zero, ^~~~~~~~ can_trim test-layers-plugin.c:197:24: warning: initialization of ‘int (*)(void *, void *, uint32_t, uint64_t)’ {aka ‘int (*)(void *, void *, unsigned int, long unsigned int)’} from incompatible pointer type ‘int (*)(void *)’ [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] .can_zero =...

...+{ + DEBUG_FUNCTION; + return 1; +} + static int test_layers_plugin_pread (void *handle, void *buf, uint32_t count, uint64_t offset, @@ -196,6 +203,7 @@ static struct nbdkit_plugin plugin = { .can_trim = test_layers_plugin_can_trim, .can_zero = test_layers_plugin_can_zero, .can_fua = test_layers_plugin_can_fua, + .can_multi_conn = test_layers_plugin_can_multi_conn, .pread = test_layers_plugin_pread, .pwrite = test_layers_plugin_pwrite, .flush = test_layers_plugin_flush, diff --git a/tests/test-layers.c b/t...

First thing to say is that I need to do a *lot* more testing on this, so this is just an early peek. In particular, although it passed ‘make check && make check-valgrind’ I have *not* tested it against a multi-conn-aware client such as the Linux kernel >= 4.9. This implements NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN, described in the protocol doc as: "NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN: Indicates that

For existing commits, this is almost identical to v1, except that I updated some commit messages and reordered the commits in a somewhat more logical sequence. The main changes are the extra commits: [06/11] plugins: Return NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN from some readonly plugins. - Readonly plugins that can set the flag unconditionally. [09/11] partitioning: Return NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN. [10/11]

This has already been pushed upstream. I am simply posting these here so we have a reference in the mailing list in case we find bugs later (as I'm sure we will - it's a complex patch series). Great thanks to Eric Blake for tireless review on this one. It also seems to have identified a few minor bugs in qemu along the way. Rich.