On 19.01.2016 20:29, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 19.01.2016 um 09:57 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben:
On 19.01.2016 00:16, Eric Blake wrote:
preserving semantics of those extra_data bytes). We
have enough room for future extension, and that's good e
Ok, so, what should go to the spec? Current wording is ok? Just
delete "Type-specific":
+
+ 20 - 23: extra_data_size
+ Size of type-specific extra data.
+
+ For now, as no extra data is defined, extra_data_size is
+ reserved and must be zero.
+
+ variable: Extra data for the bitmap.
Please be explicit that if extra_data_size is non-zero, the bitmap must
not be used (i.e. specify the incompatible-feature-bit-like behaviour).
It is not enough. If there are some unknown extra data, then just
ignoring this bitmap may lead to its inconsistency. So, if it is
non-zero, the whole image should not be written. (real
incompatible-feature-bit behavior).
Kevin
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
* now, @virtuozzo.com instead of @parallels.com. Sorry for this inconvenience.
