From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] virtio-blk: disable write cache if not negotiated Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 15:20:37 +0200 Message-ID: <4FF44325.9050104@redhat.com> References: <1341321642-24598-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1341321642-24598-3-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <4FF2F87C.6010600@redhat.com> <4FF2F8DF.4020806@redhat.com> <4FF417F3.2090400@redhat.com> <4FF4353F.8010809@redhat.com> <4FF43C29.9030104@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: anthony@codemonkey.ws, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com To: Kevin Wolf Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24550 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750941Ab2GDNUu (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2012 09:20:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4FF43C29.9030104@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 04/07/2012 14:50, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: > Before merging the patches (or actually this patch, I think patch 1 is > fairly independent), Yes, it is. > I'd like to hear more opinions on whether we need > the cache parameter split first Ok, let's discuss it next week on the KVM/QEMU call. Getting the cache parameter split before 1.2 is going to be hard, but who knows. > But as far as the hardware is > concerned, sure, take it as an Acked-by and go forward with the spec and > kernel side of things. Rusty already committed everything, so it's too late! :) (Sorry for the tabs vs. spaces BTW). Paolo