>>> On 22.10.15 at 12:45, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >> Sent: 22 October 2015 09:51 >> To: Paul Durrant >> Cc: Ian Campbell; Ian Jackson; xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; Keir >> (Xen.org); Tim (Xen.org) >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] public/io/netif.h: add extra info slots for > passing >> hash values >> >> >>> On 20.10.15 at 14:35, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: >> > @@ -390,6 +396,18 @@ >> > * type: Must be XEN_NETIF_EXTRA_TYPE_MCAST_{ADD,DEL} >> > * flags: XEN_NETIF_EXTRA_FLAG_* >> > * addr: address to add/remove >> > + * >> > + * XEN_NETIF_EXTRA_TYPE_HASH: >> > + * >> > + * 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 octet >> > + * +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ >> > + * |type |flags|htype| pad |LSB ---- value ---- MSB| >> > + * +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ >> > + * >> > + * type: Must be XEN_NETIF_EXTRA_TYPE_HASH >> > + * flags: XEN_NETIF_EXTRA_FLAG_* >> > + * htype: XEN_NETIF_HASH_TYPE_* >> > + * value: Hash value >> > */ >> >> For future extensibility, require the pad field to be zero? > > Absolutely. That was my intention but you're right that it needs to be > stated.
And (without having looked at the patches) also enforced. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
