From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751475AbZHSHNz (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:13:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751206AbZHSHNy (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:13:54 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36172 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751199AbZHSHNx (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:13:53 -0400 Message-ID: <4A8BA635.9010902@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:13:57 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gregory Haskins CC: Gregory Haskins , Anthony Liguori , Ingo Molnar , alacrityvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus_driver objects References: <20090814154125.26116.70709.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <20090814154308.26116.46980.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <20090815103243.GA26749@elte.hu> <4A870964.9090408@codemonkey.ws> <4A8965E0.8050608@gmail.com> <4A89FF08.30509@codemonkey.ws> <4A8AA9BD.2070909@gmail.com> <4A8AB076.6080906@redhat.com> <4A8ACE1F.6020402@gmail.com> <20090818165139.GC19846@redhat.com> <4A8B8F4E.80207@gmail.com> <4A8B9241.20300@redhat.com> <4A8B66280200005A00052A54@sinclair.provo.novell.com> In-Reply-To: <4A8B66280200005A00052A54@sinclair.provo.novell.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/19/2009 09:40 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote: > > >>> So if I whip up a virtio-net backend for vbus with a PCI compliant >>> connector, you are happy? >>> >>> >> This doesn't improve virtio-net in any way. >> > Any why not? (Did you notice I said "PCI compliant", i.e. over virtio-pci) > Because virtio-net will have gained nothing that it didn't have before. >> virtio already supports this model; see lguest and s390. Transporting >> virtio over vbus and vbus over something else doesn't gain anything over >> directly transporting virtio over that something else. >> > This is not what I am advocating. > > What are you advocating? As far as I can tell your virtio-vbus connector plus the vbus-kvm connector is just that. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.