> On 27 May 2026, at 9:02 PM, Eric Auger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I replied separately to this on your series thread. I am inclined to do
> so but this raises another problematic for the layered products to know
> which mismatch can be fixed
>
> Thanks
>
> Eric
>
Hence the safe-value tags :), sneak peek to v2 of RFC, with safe-value tags.
For each prop we can say:
...
{
"name": "feat_RDM",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"on"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_ATOMIC",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"on"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_CRC32",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"on"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_SHA2",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"sha256",
"sha512"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_SHA1",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"on"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_AES",
"supported-values": [
"off",
"aes",
"pmull"
],
"type": "string"
}
{
"name": "feat_NV",
"supported-values": [
"0.0"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_RAS",
"supported-values": [
"0.0",
"1.0",
"1.1_base"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_MPAM",
"supported-values": [
"0.0"
],
"type": "string"
},
{
"name": "feat_CSV2",
"supported-values": [
"0.0",
"1.0"
],
"type": "string"
},
…
I am inclined to do so but this raises another problematic for the
layered products to know which mismatch can be fixed
I am tempted to make the same argument for writable fields: how will the
layered products know which values are safe (or effectively can be set?)?
I know right now we don’t agree on keeping safe-value tags or default values.
But, I hope the above inclines you towards keeping those :)
Warm Regards,
Khushit
