Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Rusty Russell
Date: Thursday, November 8, 2007 - 3:24 pm

On Thursday 08 November 2007 13:41:16 Anthony Liguori wrote:

Huh?  Take a look at the drivers, this simply isn't true.  Do you have 
evidence that it will be true later?

Plus your code will be smaller doing a single writeb/readb loop than trying to 
do a switch statement.


You already do; the status register fills this role.  For example, you can't 
tell what features a guest understands until it updates the status register.

Hope that clarifies,
Rusty.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Anthony Liguori, (Wed Nov 7, 7:41 pm)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Rusty Russell, (Thu Nov 8, 3:24 pm)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Anthony Liguori, (Thu Nov 8, 3:33 pm)
Re: [Lguest] [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, ron minnich, (Thu Nov 8, 3:47 pm)
Re: [Lguest] [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Anthony Liguori, (Thu Nov 8, 3:49 pm)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Rusty Russell, (Fri Nov 9, 4:54 am)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Nov 9, 4:45 pm)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Rusty Russell, (Sat Nov 10, 12:58 am)
Re: [PATCH] virtio config_ops refactoring, Anthony Liguori, (Sat Nov 10, 3:08 pm)