RE: [virtio] [PATCH] VIRTIO-60: vring*, VRING_* and virtio_ring used for virtqueue without explanation

[Rusty Russell <rusty@au1.ibm.com>]

RAUCHFUSS Holm <holm.rauchfuss@huawei.com> writes:
>> From: Rusty Russell [mailto:rusty@au1.ibm.com]
>> Paul Mundt <Paul.Mundt@huawei.com> writes:
>> > Add some clarification to the head of the virtqueue section outlining
>> > how the vring/virtio_ring terminology is used throughout the
>> > specification.
>> 
>> Here's an alternative, which simply uses consistent naming.
>> 
>> This is slightly cleaner of course, but is a bit of a pain for those
>> used to the legacy names.  So it needs addition of the legacy sections
>> mentioning that, but I'll wait until MST merges his stuff into master.
>
> I think this approach does more harm than good. I suggest to rather use 
> the patch from Paul. It is less invasive to the spec.

I understand your concern, but the pain of changing the spec is
transitory.  The pain of having an unclear spec is more permanent.

> Otherwise, we would 
> also have to change the virtio_ring.h in the appendix (which the patch 
> from Rusty did not modify) and we could not link to the Linux version 
> of it as it uses the wrong naming

The Linux headers will need their own set of fixes anyway, for handling
both legacy and non-legacy cases.  I already did this in my experimental
Linux patchset.

> (btw, path in the text is pointing 
> to the wrong virtio_ring.h, trivial patch to fix this is attached).

Thanks, I've applied that immediately.

Cheers,
Rusty.