Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix reserved Feature bits numbering

[Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>]

On 12/30/2021 4:27 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 02:24:46PM +0000, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>> Hi MST/Cornelia,
>> Can you please update on the status of this patch ?
>> It's open for few months and I'm wondering if there is something wrong with it ?
> Hmm. Is there a git issue for this?

Not that I'm aware of. Who should open it ?


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 5:40 PM
>> To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>; virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org; stefanha@redhat.com; eperezma@redhat.com; Oren Duer <oren@nvidia.com>
>> Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix reserved Feature bits numbering
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:48:36AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 12 2021, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/10/2021 9:44 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 01 2021, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This should have been updated during VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA
>>>>>> and VIRTIO_F_NOTIF_CONFIG_DATA standartization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>    content.tex | 4 ++--
>>>>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex index 5c70a3c..e9a32fa
>>>>>> 100644
>>>>>> --- a/content.tex
>>>>>> +++ b/content.tex
>>>>>> @@ -99,10 +99,10 @@ \section{Feature Bits}\label{sec:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Feature B
>>>>>>    \begin{description}
>>>>>>    \item[0 to 23] Feature bits for the specific device type
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> -\item[24 to 37] Feature bits reserved for extensions to the queue
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> +\item[24 to 39] Feature bits reserved for extensions to the queue
>>>>>> +and
>>>>>>      feature negotiation mechanisms
>>>>> I'm wondering whether we should do s/reserved/used/ here?
>>>> I'm just fixing a bug here. You can take this patch and create
>>>> another one with the above suggestion on top.
>>>>
>>>> I'm ok with your suggestion.
>>> So... any opinions on whether this should get a proper vote? [I won't
>>> be able to handle that in the next weeks. Michael?]
>>
>> Feature bit numbering is an important enough matter that I'd say let's have an issue for this please, and I will do a ballot.
>>
>>>>>>    
>>>>>> -\item[38 and above] Feature bits reserved for future extensions.
>>>>>> +\item[40 and above] Feature bits reserved for future extensions.
>>>>>>    \end{description}
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>    \begin{note}