From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35898)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1S5yW1-00073Q-Ke
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:01:46 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1S5yVd-00012Q-17
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:01:45 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:20698)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1S5yVc-00012J-P3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:01:20 -0500
Message-ID: <4F59F1E0.50205@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 13:04:48 +0100
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+BHXkKGW-mfKVAw-F5YhsV7EHCObN4Z5TPUJbEaNOQGemTw2g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+BHXkKGW-mfKVAw-F5YhsV7EHCObN4Z5TPUJbEaNOQGemTw2g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] block: Virtual Bridges VERDE GOW disk
 image format, legacy GOW version 1 support implementation
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: "Leonardo E. Reiter" <lreiter@vbridges.com>
Cc: QEMU Developers Mailing List <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Am 08.03.2012 23:15, schrieb Leonardo E. Reiter:
> +BlockDriver bdrv_gow1 = {
> +    .format_name    = "gow1",
> +    .instance_size  = sizeof(gow1_state_t),
> +    .bdrv_probe     = gow1_probe,
> +    .bdrv_file_open = gow1_open,
> +    .bdrv_close     = gow1_close,
> +    .bdrv_read      = gow1_read,
> +    .bdrv_write     = gow1_write,
> +
> +    .bdrv_create    = gow1_create,
> +    .bdrv_getlength = gow1_getlength,
> +    .bdrv_truncate  = gow1_truncate,
> +    .create_options = gow1_create_options,
> +};

I wonder whether a name like verde_gow[123] wouldn't make more sense. I
think most people wouldn't be able to associate something with "gow",
and it doesn't look like a good keyword for searches either.

Also, is gow1 so different that implementing it in the same driver with
gow[23] would be impossible?

Kevin