[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Correct definition of NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA
|
From: |
Eric Blake |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Correct definition of NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA |
|
Date: |
Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:07:01 -0600 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1 |
On 03/31/2016 01:25 PM, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
> On 31 Mar 2016, at 20:14, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Should we produce a new name for it (and future command flags)
>>> that aren't shifted left 16 places, and just maintain the
>>> current value for compatibility?
>>
>> I don't see the point. Your fix looks correct.
>
> OK. And the wrongness hasn't yet got into /usr/include/linux/nbd.h
Still using the older '__be32 type;' instead of the newer '__be16 flags;
__be16 type;', changing that one will be ABI compatible, but not API
compatible. I don't know what people want to do there, :(
> or include/uapi/linux/nbd.h ; these have no reference to FUA at all,
I'm not finding that file on my system; not sure what it contains, or
where it is maintained.
> even though it does have NBD_FLAG_SEND_FLUSH, which is odd as I added
> both flags at the same time.
>
> So I'm guessing it's safe.
>
> --
> Alex Bligh
>
>
>
>
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature