virtio — archive

[PATCH v3] ACCESS_PLATFORM/ORDER_PLATFORM

From: Halil Pasic <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:25:00 -0000

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 15:09:04 +0100 Cornelia Huck <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:01:08 -0500 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 01:24:32PM +0100, Jens Freimann wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:03:37PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > + If this feature bit is negotiated, the ordering in effect for any > > > > + memory accesses by the driver that need to be ordered in a specific way > > > > + with respect to accesses by the device is the one suitable for devices > > > > + described by the platform. > > > > > > I had to read this sentence several times. How about: "Some memory > > > accesses by the driver need to be ordered in a specific way with > > > respect to accesses by the device. If this feature bit is negotiated, > > > these accesses need to match the ordering requirements of devices as > > > described for the platform." > > > > > > In any case: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jens Freimann <[email protected]> > > > > I think we can make this change under the trivial changes rule, thanks! > > I agree, and I think that Jens' wording is easier to read. > I find both of these quite tricky. Yet I consider both versions are good enough.