> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 09:16:41AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > Based on patch by Cornelia Huck.
> > >
> > > Note: for consistency, and to avoid sparse errors,
> > > convert all fields, even those no longer in use
> > > for virtio v1.0.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ...
> > >
> > > -static unsigned int features[] = {
> > > +static unsigned int features_legacy[] = {
> > > VIRTIO_BLK_F_SEG_MAX, VIRTIO_BLK_F_SIZE_MAX, VIRTIO_BLK_F_GEOMETRY,
> > > VIRTIO_BLK_F_RO, VIRTIO_BLK_F_BLK_SIZE, VIRTIO_BLK_F_SCSI,
> > > VIRTIO_BLK_F_WCE, VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY, VIRTIO_BLK_F_CONFIG_WCE,
> > > VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > > +}
> > > +;
> > > +static unsigned int features[] = {
> > > + VIRTIO_BLK_F_SEG_MAX, VIRTIO_BLK_F_SIZE_MAX, VIRTIO_BLK_F_GEOMETRY,
> > > + VIRTIO_BLK_F_RO, VIRTIO_BLK_F_BLK_SIZE,
> > > + VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY,
> > > + VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > > + VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1,
> >
> > We can fit this into less lines, like done for features_legacy.
>
> Wrt packing code more tightly, I did it like this to
> make it easier to compare the arrays.
> Each flag is on the same line in original and new array.
This just looks inconsistent to me.
1. features_legacy is tightly packed
2. half of features is tightly packed
So either all tightly packed or put every item on a single line. At least
that's what I would do :)
>
> > I was asking myself if we could do the conversion of the statical values
> > somehow upfront, to reduce the patch size and avoid cpu_to_virtio.* at those
> > places.
> >
> > Otherwise looks good to me.
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
