From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] S390: take a full byte as ext_param indicator Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:25:06 +0200 Message-ID: <4C73BA22.4000902__29300.3575913191$1282652819$gmane$org@suse.de> References: <1282599077-29857-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4C736EAF.9020107@de.ibm.com> <4C73B5C1.5040603@suse.de> <4C73B78C.2030003@de.ibm.com> <4C73B97E.2060303@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C73B97E.2060303@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Avi Kivity Cc: KVM list , Christian Ehrhardt , Carsten Otte , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Christian Borntraeger List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/24/2010 03:14 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> I have no strong opinion on that, but I think its more a matter of where >> to put an interface description. A header file seems just the right >> place. >> I will let you (or Rusty) decide. > > First of all we need a virtio/s390 specification, like we have a > virtio/pci spec. Sure, go ahead and write one :). All the bits are open. No seriously, I've wanted to write one for quite a while but this is not the right patch set for this. > Second, I agree it should be in an exported header file, even if qemu > doesn't make use of it. It's an interface and should be exported. Hrm. *shrug* if you think it makes sense. I'm reasonably indifferent either way, but I don't see value-add in it. Alex