From: Andy King <acking@vmware.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: dtor@vmware.com, pv-drivers@vmware.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:42:21 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1979127675.2501555.1360039341169.JavaMail.root@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130108.174601.1788895671912734725.davem@davemloft.net>
Hi Dave,
> >> Instead, what I remember doing was deferring to the feedback these
> >> folks received, stating that ideas that the virtio people had
> >> mentioned should be considered instead.
> >>
> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135301515818462&w=2
> >
> > I believe Andy replied to Anthony's AF_VMCHANNEL post and the
> > differences between the proposed solutions.
>
> I'd much rather see a hypervisor neutral solution than a hypervisor
> specific one which this certainly is.
We've addressed this with the latest patch series, which I sent earlier
today. vSockets now has support for pluggable transports, of which VMCI
happens to be the first; all transport code is separated out into its
own module. So the core is now hypervisor neutral. Given that, would
you be willing to re-consider it, please? If at all possible, we'd like
to make the current merge window.
Thanks so much!
- Andy
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy King <acking@vmware.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: pv-drivers@vmware.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
dtor@vmware.com
Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:42:21 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1979127675.2501555.1360039341169.JavaMail.root@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130108.174601.1788895671912734725.davem@davemloft.net>
Hi Dave,
> >> Instead, what I remember doing was deferring to the feedback these
> >> folks received, stating that ideas that the virtio people had
> >> mentioned should be considered instead.
> >>
> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135301515818462&w=2
> >
> > I believe Andy replied to Anthony's AF_VMCHANNEL post and the
> > differences between the proposed solutions.
>
> I'd much rather see a hypervisor neutral solution than a hypervisor
> specific one which this certainly is.
We've addressed this with the latest patch series, which I sent earlier
today. vSockets now has support for pluggable transports, of which VMCI
happens to be the first; all transport code is separated out into its
own module. So the core is now hypervisor neutral. Given that, would
you be willing to re-consider it, please? If at all possible, we'd like
to make the current merge window.
Thanks so much!
- Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-05 4:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-08 23:59 [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming George Zhang
2013-01-08 23:59 ` [PATCH 1/6] VSOCK: vsock protocol implementation George Zhang
2013-01-08 23:59 ` [PATCH 2/6] VSOCK: vsock address implementaion George Zhang
2013-01-08 23:59 ` [PATCH 3/6] VSOCK: notification implementation George Zhang
2013-01-09 0:00 ` [PATCH 4/6] VSOCK: statistics implementation George Zhang
2013-01-09 0:00 ` [PATCH 5/6] VSOCK: utility functions George Zhang
2013-01-09 0:00 ` [PATCH 6/6] VSOCK: header and config files George Zhang
2013-01-09 0:21 ` [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming Greg KH
2013-01-09 0:21 ` Greg KH
2013-01-09 1:30 ` David Miller
2013-01-09 1:30 ` David Miller
2013-01-09 1:41 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2013-01-09 1:41 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2013-01-09 1:46 ` David Miller
2013-01-09 1:46 ` David Miller
2013-01-09 2:22 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2013-01-09 2:22 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2013-01-09 8:10 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2013-01-09 8:10 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2013-01-10 2:42 ` Andy King
2013-01-10 2:42 ` Andy King
2013-01-25 21:33 ` Andy King
2013-01-25 21:33 ` Andy King
2013-02-05 4:42 ` Andy King [this message]
2013-02-05 4:42 ` Andy King
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-11-11 21:59 Sasha Levin
2012-11-14 16:42 ` [Pv-drivers] " Andy King
2012-11-05 18:09 David Miller
2012-11-05 18:19 ` [Pv-drivers] " Andy King
2012-11-07 6:58 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2012-11-07 6:58 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2012-11-08 15:47 ` Andy King
2012-11-08 15:47 ` Andy King
2012-11-15 21:32 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-11-15 21:32 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-11-19 9:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-11-19 9:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-12-06 15:28 ` Andy King
2012-12-06 15:28 ` Andy King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1979127675.2501555.1360039341169.JavaMail.root@vmware.com \
--to=acking@vmware.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dtor@vmware.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pv-drivers@vmware.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.