[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ty5jre1r.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 11:21:44 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add virtio-scsi to the virtio spec
On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 09:55:30 +0100, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 04:14 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > I'd prefer to see the spec only cover things
> > which are implemented and tested, otherwise the risk of a flaw in the
> > spec is really high in my experience.
>
> In general I agree, and I did that for virtio-specific things such as
> the eventq and the configuration space. This is also why I don't want
> to add untested controlq requests that people suggested.
>
> However, there's tension between this and providing a complete SCSI
> transport. SCSI is roughly defined as a set of RPC interfaces ("Send
> command", "Abort task", etc.) and transports provide the RPC protocol.
> The SCSI command set changes relatively often, but the RPC interfaces
> are pretty stable. This stability limits the risk, and having a mapping
> for all interfaces also makes future changes less likely.
OK, I expect that someone reading the spec will be SCSI-familiar more
than virtio-familiar, so it's more important that they be comfortable,
than that I be comfortable.
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