Re: [virtio] [PATCH v2] conformance: clarify transitional/non-transitional

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 12:01:41 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> We already have a specification for conformance targets for
> non-transitional devices.
> Just add another clause that transitional devices satisfy.
> 
> VIRTIO-167
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
>  conformance.tex | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/conformance.tex b/conformance.tex
> index 6df113b..8b69e39 100644
> --- a/conformance.tex
> +++ b/conformance.tex
> @@ -341,13 +341,9 @@ A conformant implementation MUST be either transitional or
>  non-transitional, see \ref{intro:Legacy
>  Interface: Terminology}.
>  
> -A non-transitional implementation conforms to this specification
> -if it satisfies all of the MUST or REQUIRED level requirements
> -defined above.
> -
> -An implementation MAY choose to implement OPTIONAL support for the
> +A transitional implementation MUST implement support for the
>  legacy interface, including support for legacy drivers
> -or devices, by additionally conforming to all of the MUST or
> +or devices, by conforming to all of the MUST or
>  REQUIRED level requirements for the legacy interface
>  for the transitional devices and drivers.
>  

Wouldn't that be v4?

I'm currently very confused by the avalanche of patches and which issues
they fix...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that 
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php