From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756013Ab1IGRwx (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:52:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22753 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751352Ab1IGRww (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:52:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4E67AF6A.9090400@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 19:52:42 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110816 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Clements CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] nbd: add support for feature negotiation References: <1315406503-7883-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1315406503-7883-3-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/07/2011 06:30 PM, Paul Clements wrote: > Could you name this as NBD_SET_FLAGS, as that's more consistent with > what it's really doing? I named it differently intentionally, actually, because it should not use the flags field from the network protocol as is. Also, "features" sounds more like something that is optional, while unrecognized "flags" should probably cause a failure. What about renaming the struct field and leaving this as NBD_SET_FEATURES or NBD_ENABLE_FEATURES? Paolo