From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: Virtual Bus Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 12:07:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20090408110737.GQ18076@redhat.com> References: Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Tej Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 08:39:03PM +0530, Tej wrote: > Are xen ppl are thinking to leverage Virtual Bus Technology recently > discussed on LKML > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/31/339 > http://developer.novell.com/wiki/index.php/Virtual-bus As I was reading that thread, the discussion seemed to descend into a debate about whether this could all be achieved just by optimizing the existing VirtIO driver backends / host, or whether the Virtual-bus concepts could be incorporated into VirtIO in some way. So its probably a little premature to talk about integrating this in Xen. Now an interesting project that could be tried today is to setup Xend/QEMU-dm to be able to use VirtIO drivers and then do some performance comparisons between VirtIO & netfront/back & blkfront/back. The backends for VirtIO are all implemented entirely within QEMU, so in theory it ought to be easy to get them working under Xen. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|