On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:40:26 pm Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:40:59PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 August 2009, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > I'd like to avoid that here,
> > > > though it's kind of ugly. We'd need VHOST_GET_FEATURES (and ACK) to
> > > > take a
> > > > struct like:
> > > >
> > > > u32 feature_size;
> > > > u32 features[];
> >
> > Hmm, variable length ioctl arguments, I'd rather not go there.
> > The ioctl infrastructure already has a length argument encoded
> > in the ioctl number. We can use that if we need more, e.g.
> >
> > /* now */
> > #define VHOST_GET_FEATURES _IOR(VHOST_VIRTIO, 0x00, __u64)
> > /*
> > * uncomment if we run out of feature bits:
> >
> > struct vhost_get_features2 {
> > __u64 bits[2];
> > };
> > #define VHOST_GET_FEATURES2 _IOR(VHOST_VIRTIO, 0x00, \
> > struct vhost_get_features2)
> > */
>
>
> I thought so, too. Rusty, agree?
Yep, am convinced. Make it u64 to stop us having to do this tomorrow, then
we can always extend later.
Thanks,
Rusty.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
