lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sjl6tsnm.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:58:45 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
	lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
	Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@...ibm.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@...il.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 RFC] virtio-pci: flexible configuration layout

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:41:51 +0200, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:25:43AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > > But I'm *terrified* of making the spec more complex;
> > > 
> > > All you do is move stuff around. Why do you think it simplifies the spec
> > > so much?
> > 
> > No, but it reduces the yuk factor.  Which has been important to adoption.
> 
> Sorry if I'm dense. Could you please clarify: do you think we can live
> with the slightly higher yuk factor assuming the spec moves the
> legacy mode into an appendix as you explain below and driver has a
> single 'legacy' switch?

Yep, it's all a trade-off.  A clean slate is good, but if we can make
our lives in transition less painful, I'm all for it.

> I think I see a way to do that in a relatively painless way.
> Do you prefer seeing driver patches or spec? Or are you not interested
> in reusing the same structure at all?

I think we should look at code at this point; my gut says we're going to
be not-quite-similar-enough-to-be-useful.  At which point, a clean-slate
approach is more appealing.  But the code will show, one way or another.

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ