On 03/31/2016 01:25 PM, Alex Bligh wrote: > > On 31 Mar 2016, at 20:14, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>> >>> >>> Should we produce a new name for it (and future command flags) >>> that aren't shifted left 16 places, and just maintain the >>> current value for compatibility? >> >> I don't see the point. Your fix looks correct. > > OK. And the wrongness hasn't yet got into /usr/include/linux/nbd.h
Still using the older '__be32 type;' instead of the newer '__be16 flags; __be16 type;', changing that one will be ABI compatible, but not API compatible. I don't know what people want to do there, :( > or include/uapi/linux/nbd.h ; these have no reference to FUA at all, I'm not finding that file on my system; not sure what it contains, or where it is maintained. > even though it does have NBD_FLAG_SEND_FLUSH, which is odd as I added > both flags at the same time. > > So I'm guessing it's safe. > > -- > Alex Bligh > > > > -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
