Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix reserved Feature bits numbering

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Aug 12 2021, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On 8/10/2021 9:44 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 01 2021, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This should have been updated during VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA and
>>> VIRTIO_F_NOTIF_CONFIG_DATA standartization.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>>   content.tex | 4 ++--
>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex
>>> index 5c70a3c..e9a32fa 100644
>>> --- a/content.tex
>>> +++ b/content.tex
>>> @@ -99,10 +99,10 @@ \section{Feature Bits}\label{sec:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Feature B
>>>   \begin{description}
>>>   \item[0 to 23] Feature bits for the specific device type
>>>   
>>> -\item[24 to 37] Feature bits reserved for extensions to the queue and
>>> +\item[24 to 39] Feature bits reserved for extensions to the queue and
>>>     feature negotiation mechanisms
>> I'm wondering whether we should do s/reserved/used/ here?
>
> I'm just fixing a bug here. You can take this patch and create another 
> one with the above suggestion on top.
>
> I'm ok with your suggestion.

So... any opinions on whether this should get a proper vote? [I won't be
able to handle that in the next weeks. Michael?]

>
>>
>>>   
>>> -\item[38 and above] Feature bits reserved for future extensions.
>>> +\item[40 and above] Feature bits reserved for future extensions.
>>>   \end{description}
>>>   
>>>   \begin{note}