From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752093Ab1JKHgi (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 03:36:38 -0400 Received: from nat28.tlf.novell.com ([130.57.49.28]:65217 "EHLO nat28.tlf.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750872Ab1JKHgh convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 03:36:37 -0400 Message-Id: <4E940E21020000780005AA29@nat28.tlf.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 8.0.1 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 08:36:33 +0100 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" Cc: "Ian Campbell" , "hch@infradead.org" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "Dong Yang Li" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/blk[front|back]: Enhance discard support with secure erasing support. References: <1318260494-27985-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> <1318260494-27985-4-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> <1318263187.21903.464.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <20111010164250.GG28646@phenom.oracle.com> <1318274402.27397.13.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> <20111010195749.GA5755@phenom.oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <20111010195749.GA5755@phenom.oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> On 10.10.11 at 21:57, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 08:20:02PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 17:42 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 05:13:07PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >> >> > > In any case it should also be posted against the canonical inter-guest >> > > interface definition in the xen tree for review with that in mind. >> > >> > Yes! But I was thinking to first let this one rattle a bit and see what >> > folks thought about it before submitting the xen-devel. >> >> It's a good idea to get ABI changes out for review before the >> implementation rattles around so much that changing it becomes hard. > > OK, lets drop this until we get that straigthen out. I've posted > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-10/msg00642.html the > changes to > Xen ABI. Yeah, but that didn't get adjusted after IanC's comments (structure alignment, BLKIF_OP_DISCARD_FLAG_SECURE value). Further I wonder why you don't use the "reserved" field instead of extending the structure at the end. Jan