OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

virtio-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


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



On 12/30/2021 4:27 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 02:24:46PM +0000, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
Hi MST/Cornelia,
Can you please update on the status of this patch ?
It's open for few months and I'm wondering if there is something wrong with it ?
Hmm. Is there a git issue for this?

Not that I'm aware of. Who should open it ?


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 5:40 PM
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>; virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org; stefanha@redhat.com; eperezma@redhat.com; Oren Duer <oren@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix reserved Feature bits numbering

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:48:36AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
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?]

Feature bit numbering is an important enough matter that I'd say let's have an issue for this please, and I will do a ballot.

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


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]