From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pekka Enberg Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:27:16 +0300 Message-ID: <1302251236.27918.31.camel@jaguar> References: <1301592656.586.15.camel@jaguar> <4D982E89.8070502@redhat.com> <4D9847BC.9060906@redhat.com> <4D98716D.9040307@codemonkey.ws> <4D9873CD.3080207@redhat.com> <20110406093333.GB6465@elte.hu> <4D9E6F6E.9050709@codemonkey.ws> <4D9EBBC3.2040803@siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anthony Liguori , Ingo Molnar , Avi Kivity , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aarcange@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org, asias.hejun@gmail.com, gorcunov@gmail.com To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4D9EBBC3.2040803@siemens.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Hi Jan, On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 09:39 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > I agree that it's easy to change 2kSomething LOC for this. But if you > now wait too long designing in essential features like SMP, a scalable > execution model, and - very important - portability (*), it can get > fairly painful to fix such architectural deficits later on. How long did > it take for Linux to overcome the BKL? QEMU is in the same unfortunate > position. Yup, and we're taking your feedback seriously (and are thankful for it!). We're hoping to look at SMP in the near future - help is appreciated! Pekka