From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] PV device infrastructure v2 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:31:33 -0500 Message-ID: <1187152293.18708.6.camel@squirrel> References: <20070814233352.11895.55788.stgit@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> <46C269EE.10807@qumranet.com> <1187149634.4165.151.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> <46C279E6.40004@qumranet.com> <1187151233.4165.166.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Gregory Haskins Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1187151233.4165.166.camel-5CR4LY5GPkvLDviKLk5550HKjMygAv58XqFh9Ls21Oc@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 00:13 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 06:58 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > > > Yes. virtio adapts the driver interface to an API can drive a shared > > memory queue more easily, while you actually provide the queue protocol > > (and ABI). > > If I understand what you are saying, it actually jives with something > that struck me as a potentially win-win a while back when I first heard > about virtio. That is: you can actually implement virtio with ioq. I > am not sure if that idea has any merit or not, especially given the news > that virtio for KVM is almost done....but I thought I would mention it. BTW, the lguest virtio implementation is available in Rusty's patch queue (linked off http://lguest.ozlabs.org). Regards, Anthony Liguori > > > > virtio seems to have more modest goals: > > > > - make it easier to write guest/host (or guest/guest) transports, but > > not actually provide them > > - limited to guest only (and Linux only) > > - no discovery/hotplug (yet?) > > As an aside, the version of the pvbus that I am working on right now > (v3?) adds hotplug capability. I assume that there is some merit to me > continuing the work at least on the discovery/hotplug front then? > > > > since it wants to be hypervisor agnostic, it cannot specify an ABI (as > > some already have ABIs, for example Xen). > > I see, and that is a good point. By only being an API, virtio can work > over XenBus or any other ABI it wants. IOQ is an API *and* an ABI. > While this doesnt preclude it from ever working on Xen, it does imply > that you would need to add the IOQ ABI to the Xen infrastructure if you > wanted to use it (at least, if you wanted to use it directly instead of > doing some kind of funky queue-in-queue with IOQ on XenBus..yuk). > > -Greg > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > kvm-devel mailing list > kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/