On 03/29/2016 10:01 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 03/28/2016 04:43 AM, Denis V. Lunev wrote: >> From: Pavel Borzenkov <pborzen...@virtuozzo.com> >> >> Add separate "Command flags" section to make it clear which flags are >> currently defined by the protocol. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Borzenkov <pborzen...@virtuozzo.com> >> Reviewed-by: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> >> Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <d...@openvz.org> >> CC: Wouter Verhelst <w...@uter.be> >> CC: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> >> CC: Alex Bligh <a...@alex.org.uk> >> --- >> doc/proto.md | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/doc/proto.md b/doc/proto.md >> index 036d6d9..662f741 100644 >> --- a/doc/proto.md >> +++ b/doc/proto.md >> @@ -485,6 +485,16 @@ The following request types exist: >> Currently one such message is known: `NBD_CMD_CACHE`, with type set to >> 5, implemented by xnbd. >> >> +#### Command flags >> + > > I think that this new content would belong better as a subsection under > '#### Flag Fields', alongside the mention of all other flags. I'm going > to propose a v2 of this patch with that alternate position, for comparison.
Hmm, maybe not. I just looked again, and '#### Flag fields' is a subsection of '### Handshake phase', while you are correct that command flags belong to '### Transmission phase'. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Transform Data into Opportunity. Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. Click to learn more. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785471&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________ Nbd-general mailing list Nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nbd-general