In case of -EAGAIN returned by update_refcount(), we should discard the
cluster offset we were trying to allocate and request a new one, because
in theory that old offset might now be taken by a refcount block.

In practice, this was not the case due to update_refcount() generally
returning strictly monotonic increasing cluster offsets. However, this
behavior is not set in stone, and it is also not obvious when looking at
qcow2_alloc_bytes() alone, so we should not rely on it.
Reported-by: NKevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NMax Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NKevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>