On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 05:30:34AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > On 12/4/22 00:19, Alvaro Karsz wrote: > > So, we could create a block-general lifetime ioctl with many reserved > > bytes, or create a virtio block specific ioctl without reserved bytes > > at all. > > I think that we should keep it virtio specific, and if a new lifetime > > command is added to the spec with more fields, we could create a new > > ioctl. > > Does Everyone agree? > > > > Unless there are multiple drivers supporting same IOCTL and agreeing > the same semantics I've not seen new block layer IOCTL was accepted > you never know .. > > Personally I'd not, unless I find other major drivers and specs > agreeing on semantics.. > > -ck > OK looks like we are in agreement we can keep it as is then. If new types are added we'll add a new ioctl not a big deal. Please do Cc storage mailing lists on the next version though. -- MST _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
