[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio] [PATCH v2] conformance: clarify transitional/non-transitional
On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 12:01:41 -0400 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> 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> > --- > 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. > Wouldn't that be v4? I'm currently very confused by the avalanche of patches and which issues they fix...
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]