On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 07:10:22PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 13:41:29 +0100 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 09:47:20AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > Well, we do need the changes in way more than two places, as every host > > > or guest has to collect the definitions on its own, no? > > > > This has nothing to do with host. > > Hm, but all hosts and all guests need the ids, no? > > > It's just using linux source as main basis for the file > > simply because linux is a higher visibility project than qemu, > > they won't borrow code from us but we can borrow from them. > > It still seems restricting to use Linux as the ultimate source - and > that has nothing to do with visibililty. I'd say pulling from any > project is restricting: Why shouldn't we want to implement something in > qemu that Linux is not (yet) interested in, but other guests are?
We can always add such a hypothetical feature in a qemu specific headers. But most things are shared, and manual duplication is bad. > > > (Granted, with > > > Linux and qemu you get most of the users; but it feels a bit strange > > > for a host implementation to collect information from one of its > > > guests. I really think that we should go back to the common root. > > > Didn't we have a BSD-licenced header in the spec?) > > > > virtio linux headers are also BSD licensed intentionally for this > > purpose. > > * This header is BSD licensed so anyone can use the definitions to > > * implement compatible drivers/servers. > > Sure, but I always took this to mean "you can freely copy the > definitions", not "this is the authorative source". virtio spec only has a ring header. We could get it from there but it's easier to get everything from one place I think. -- MST