Re: [PATCH v2] conformance: clarify transitional/non-transitional

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:01:41PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> We already have a specification for conformance targets for
> non-transitional devices.
> Just add another clause that transitional devices satisfy.
> 
> VIRTIO-167
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>

Correction: this should be v4.
Will repost with the correct version #.

> ---
>  conformance.tex | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/conformance.tex b/conformance.tex
> index 6df113b..8b69e39 100644
> --- a/conformance.tex
> +++ b/conformance.tex
> @@ -341,13 +341,9 @@ A conformant implementation MUST be either transitional or
>  non-transitional, see \ref{intro:Legacy
>  Interface: Terminology}.
>  
> -A non-transitional implementation conforms to this specification
> -if it satisfies all of the MUST or REQUIRED level requirements
> -defined above.
> -
> -An implementation MAY choose to implement OPTIONAL support for the
> +A transitional implementation MUST implement support for the
>  legacy interface, including support for legacy drivers
> -or devices, by additionally conforming to all of the MUST or
> +or devices, by conforming to all of the MUST or
>  REQUIRED level requirements for the legacy interface
>  for the transitional devices and drivers.
>  
> -- 
> MST