lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/blk[front|back]: Enhance discard support with secure erasing support.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 08:36:33AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 10.10.11 at 21:57, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:20:02PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 17:42 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 05:13:07PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>
> >> > > In any case it should also be posted against the canonical inter-guest
> >> > > interface definition in the xen tree for review with that in mind.
> >> >
> >> > Yes! But I was thinking to first let this one rattle a bit and see what
> >> > folks thought about it before submitting the xen-devel.
> >>
> >> It's a good idea to get ABI changes out for review before the
> >> implementation rattles around so much that changing it becomes hard.
> >
> > OK, lets drop this until we get that straigthen out. I've posted
> > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-10/msg00642.html the
> > changes to
> > Xen ABI.
>
> Yeah, but that didn't get adjusted after IanC's comments (structure
> alignment, BLKIF_OP_DISCARD_FLAG_SECURE value).

My later response to it should include it:
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-10/msg00652.html

>
> Further I wonder why you don't use the "reserved" field instead of
> extending the structure at the end.

<blinks> I completly missed it. That would definitly work as well.

Let me redo it with that in mind.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 17:55    [W:0.096 / U:2.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site