Re: [PATCH v3] spec: Clarify BLOCK_STATUS reply details

[Eric Blake]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 11:48:46AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

Whoops, looks like I let this one sit for a while.

> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 04:08:07PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> > Our docs were inconsistent on whether a NBD_REPLY_TYPE_BLOCK_STATUS
> > reply chunk can exceed the client's requested length, and silent on
> > whether the lengths must be consistent when multiple contexts were
> > negotiated.  Clarify this to match existing practice as implemented in
> > qemu-nbd.  Clean up some nearby grammatical errors while at it.
> > ---
> > 
> > Another round of rewording attempts, based on feedback from Rich on
> > v2.  I went ahead and pushed patch 1 and 2 of the v2 series, as they
> > were less controversial.
> > 
> 
> This seems clearer now, thanks.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>

I've pushed this one as commit edaa645

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org