Re: KVM usability

[Zachary Amsden <zamsden@redhat.com>]

On 03/01/2010 07:41 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 06:48:07AM -1000, Zachary Amsden escreveu:
>    
>> On 02/27/2010 07:25 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>      
>>> I'm not talking about moving it into a kernel _module_ - albeit that
>>> alone is a worthwile thing to do for any performance sensitive hw
>>> component.
>>>
>>> I was talking about the option of a clean, stripped down Qemu base
>>> hosted in the kernel proper, in linux/tools/kvm/ or so. If i were
>>> running a virtualization effort it would be the first place i'd
>>> consider to put my tooling into.
>>>        
>    
>> So ripping out a clean part interface like PCI bus infrastructure and
>> using it in the kernel, for example, does nothing except put that
>> infrastructure in two different places, because everything the kernel
>> does, userspace will have to do again anyway.  So now you have twice as
>> much code involving the same idea and you have to keep the pieces in
>> sync and from trampling each other.
>>
>> The only parts that warrant such complexity and high risk for bugs are
>> performance critical things like the PIT and APIC.
>>      
> I guess there is some misunderstanding here, the tools/ directory that
> lives in the kernel _sources_, has no kernel source, its all userspace
> stuff.

Yeah, no morning coffee :=)

So instead we are advocating forking qemu into the kernel.  That makes 
even less sense.  It's not sustainable or eco-friendly to either community.

Zach