Re: Enhance perf to support KVM

Ingo Molnar
2010-02-26T14:23:51Z

* Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 02/26/2010 03:16 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >* Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> That was not what i suggested tho. tools/kvm/ would work plenty fine.
> >>>
> >> I'll wait until we have tools/libc and tools/X. After all, they affect a
> >> lot more people and are concerned with a lot more kernel/user interfaces
> >> than kvm.
> >
> > So your answer can be summed up as: 'we wont do what makes sense
> > technically because others suck even more' ?
>
> I can sum up your this remark as 'whenever you disagree with me, I will
> rephrase your words to make you look like an idiot'.

Two points:

1)

You can try to ridicule me if you want, but do you actually claim that my
summary is inaccurate?

I do claim it's a substantially accurate summary: you said you will (quote:)
"wait with tools/kvm/ until we have tools/libc and tools/X".

I do think tools/X and tools/libc would make quite a bit of sense - this is
one of the better design aspects of FreeBSD et al. It's a mistake that it's
not being done.

2)

I used a question mark (the sentence was not a statement of fact), and you
have no obligation to agree with the summary i provided.

Ingo