Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:51:33 -0400 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: [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.
| |