Re: [PATCH] Use PCI revision field to indicate virtio PCI ABI version

[Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>]

Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2008 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>   
>> That's not what I was agreeing too.  I don't want to plumb an ABI 
>> interface through virtio for each device.  This is what I didn't like 
>> about having an ABI field in the first place.  I'm thinking we should 
>> just drop both of these and instead just rely on feature bits.
>>     
>
> Me also updating the our prototype code to the latest levels...
>
> And I agree with Anthony. Feature bits seems to be a much better solution 
> than ABI versions.
>   

I agree that feature bits are the long term solution; but we need a 
short term solution before the ABI is stabilized.  We don't want to add 
feature bits now, since that will encode virtio development history into 
those bits (likely consuming most of them).


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function