From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43522) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XuIu5-0002zM-Oq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:36:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XuItw-0000Ci-Of for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:35:57 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]:45437) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XuItw-0000CE-HP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:35:48 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id l15so18162195wiw.8 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 02:35:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:35:45 +0000 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Message-ID: <20141128103545.GC11358@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> References: <1416392276-10408-1-git-send-email-tumanova@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20141125130115.GD21126@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> <5475A890.5060705@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Fig2xvG2VGoz8o/s" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5475A890.5060705@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] Geometry and blocksize support for backing devices List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ekaterina Tumanova Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Public KVM Mailing List , armbru@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, Stefan Hajnoczi , cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, mihajlov@linux.vnet.ibm.com --Fig2xvG2VGoz8o/s Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:16:48PM +0300, Ekaterina Tumanova wrote: > On 11/25/2014 04:01 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:17:50AM +0100, Ekaterina Tumanova wrote: > >3. Why does s390 need to customize hd_geometry_guess()? > > > Since hd_geometry_guess contains semantics of x86-specific LBA translation, > we have to modify it not to get in the way of z > architecture If the behavior is x86-specific, it should be made x86-specific. z, ppc, sparc, arm, etc should share the non-x86-specific code path. It's weird to single out z here, this seems like the wrong way around. Is the x86-specific behavior a problem in practice? No one seemed to mind for the other targets. --Fig2xvG2VGoz8o/s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUeFABAAoJEJykq7OBq3PIkoQH/RBktETrQKooTidwfgrJ+BE2 mgOSjHi94yyeXvnla3xThL8MODzanN9pCpBDKVAABOX/Tl2uZVg8Mw8S9rtHYGEr XDyyjC1gRoGapOJE+cjMzlsZi6D+mTL1pNxYSoH7jTEYIH5kgv3NdwNUm7Jl6E5N eSZAoz+TqFFC0D+VrgV+OuUuTyKnkytW1qgsutY621iKSO4WYxt/Z+dL7SUQ/G2T O6BCjCtSDrwmgJL/jNApqpjWATDJFDSNmJ7YIHvvsNuFQFMBJpEM521I+NLev8Px 1crHooQPmncI0uiJylE2zAoRb3iKbiSGpu6JdHFrO4slEF7DYISVRARVthXdtb8= =08jL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Fig2xvG2VGoz8o/s--