From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50940)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1YqfcR-0006Jm-4p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:34:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1YqfcM-0005mx-35
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 06:34:59 -0400
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 12:34:48 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20150508103448.GD4318@noname.redhat.com>
References: <20150507122911.GB4571@noname.redhat.com>
	<554B5ED3.4030405@redhat.com>
	<20150507132056.GC4571@noname.redhat.com>
	<554B6EBB.1010001@redhat.com>
	<20150507140716.GE4571@noname.redhat.com>
	<554B73C2.4030908@redhat.com>
	<20150507143418.GF4571@noname.redhat.com>
	<554B7BBC.2040508@redhat.com>
	<20150508100832.GC4318@noname.redhat.com>
	<554C8D1B.8030307@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <554C8D1B.8030307@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH v2 0/3] block: Warn about
 usage of growing formats over non-growable protocols
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>

Am 08.05.2015 um 12:16 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben:
> On 08/05/2015 12:08, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > If so, the commands seem to be hopelessly underspecified, especially
> > with respect to error conditions. And where it says something about
> > errors, it doesn't make sense: The server is forbidden to reply to a
> > NBD_CMD_FLUSH if it failed... (qemu-nbd ignores this, obviously)
> 
> So does nbd-server. O:-)  Looks like you're reading the spec too
> literally (which is never a bad thing).

I don't think there is something like reading a spec too literally.
Specs are meant to be read literally. If a specification is open to
interpretation, you don't need it. So I'd rather say I've found a bug
in the spec. ;-)

As you already seem to be working on the NBD mailing list, do you want
to fix this, or should I subscribe and send a patch myself?

Kevin