Il 04/10/2012 14:51, Rusty Russell ha scritto:
> Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Il 04/10/2012 02:11, Rusty Russell ha scritto:
>>>>> There's a reason I haven't done this. I really, really dislike "my
>>>>> implemention isn't broken" feature bits. We could have an infinite
>>>>> number of them, for each bug in each device.
>>>>
>>>> However, this bug affects (almost) all implementations and (almost) all
>>>> devices. It even makes sense to reserve a transport feature bit for it
>>>> instead of a device feature bit.
>>>
>>> Perhaps, but we have to fix the bugs first!
>>
>> Yes. :) Isn't that what mst's patch does?
>>
>>> As I said, my torture patch broke qemu immediately. Since noone has
>>> leapt onto fixing that, I'll take a look now...
>>
>> I can look at virtio-scsi.
>
> Actually, you can't, see my reply to Anthony...
>
> Message-ID: <87lifm1y1n.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
struct virtio_scsi_req_cmd {
// Read-only
u8 lun[8];
u64 id;
u8 task_attr;
u8 prio;
u8 crn;
char cdb[cdb_size];
char dataout[];
// Write-only part
u32 sense_len;
u32 residual;
u16 status_qualifier;
u8 status;
u8 response;
u8 sense[sense_size];
char datain[];
};
where cdb_size and sense_size come from configuration space. The device
right now expects everything before dataout/datain to be in a single
descriptor, but that's in no way part of the spec. Am I missing
something egregious?
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
