Il 04/10/2012 14:51, Rusty Russell ha scritto:
> Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> 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....@rustcorp.com.au>

    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 majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to