[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH] Data integrity extension support for xen-block

Bob Liu writes ("[RFC PATCH] Data integrity extension support for xen-block"):
> +/*
> + * Extra request, must follow a normal-request and a normal-request can
> + * only be followed by one extra request.
> + */

I don't myself have (yet) an opinion about the syntax of this.  I'd
like to hear from others.

> +enum blkif_extra_request_type {
> +     BLKIF_EXTRA_TYPE_DIX = 1,               /* Data integrity extension 
> payload.  */

This needs a definition of the semantics of the payload.  I suggest
this be done by references to appropriate external specifications.

> + * Recognized only if "feature-extra-request" is present in backend
> + * xenbus info.

(Wordwrapped for quoting: please wrap it yourself.)

I think the frontend needs to know whether the data integrity
extension is supported, not whether the extra request is supported.

If the supported length of the integrity data might vary (which I
think it might), it also needs to know that length.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.