Re: KVM usability

Ingo Molnar
2010-03-02T00:33:55Z

* Zachary Amsden <zamsden@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 03/01/2010 11:45 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >On 03/01/2010 02:56 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >> - Code distribution is easy: it comes with the kernel. This
> >>spreads the code
> >> far and wide. It's easy for kernel developers to jump in and
> >>help out, the
> >> latest devel code is always there, a single 'cd tools/perf/;
> >>make -j install'
> >> command away.
> >> - Code reuse: we started sharing/librarizing code with the
> >>kernel: bitmap.h,
> >> hash.h, list.h, rbtree.h, bitops.h, prefetch.h.
> >
> >You could argue that any project should be in the kernel for these
> >reasons. I see no reason why something as like KVM should be part
> >of the kernel and udev shouldn't be.
>
> gcc and the kernel are quite closely coupled, btw.

Note that GCC isnt very much coupled to the kernel. The _kernel_ is coupled to
GCC pretty much. (although it's known to build with certain versions of LVVM
and also perhaps ICC)

The most obvious utilities to move into tools/ are the ones that are
bidirectionally coupled: udev, perhaps util-linux, etc.

Ingo