RE: [virtio] [PATCH] VIRTIO-60: vring*, VRING_* and virtio_ring used for virtqueue without explanation

RAUCHFUSS Holm <> writes: >>
From: Rusty Russell [ mailto: ] >> Paul Mundt <> writes: >>
> Add some clarification to the head of the virtqueue section outlining >>
> how the vring/virtio_ring terminology is used throughout the >>
> specification. >>  >> Here's an alternative, which simply uses consistent naming. >>  >> This is slightly cleaner of course, but is a bit of a pain for those >> used to the legacy names.  So it needs addition of the legacy sections >> mentioning that, but I'll wait until MST merges his stuff into master. >
> I think this approach does more harm than good. I suggest to rather use
> the patch from Paul. It is less invasive to the spec.  I understand your concern, but the pain of changing the spec is transitory.  The pain of having an unclear spec is more permanent.
> Otherwise, we would
> also have to change the virtio_ring.h in the appendix (which the patch
> from Rusty did not modify) and we could not link to the Linux version
> of it as it uses the wrong naming  The Linux headers will need their own set of fixes anyway, for handling both legacy and non-legacy cases.  I already did this in my experimental Linux patchset.  > (btw, path in the text is pointing
> to the wrong virtio_ring.h, trivial patch to fix this is attached).  Thanks, I've applied that immediately.  Cheers, Rusty.