From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] KVM paravirtualization for Linux Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 18:29:46 +0000 Message-ID: <20070107182946.GA8158@infradead.org> References: <20070105215223.GA5361@elte.hu> <20070106130817.GB5660@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Return-path: To: Pavel Machek Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070106130817.GB5660-+ZI9xUNit7I@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 01:08:18PM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote: > Does this make Xen obsolete? I mean... we have xen patches in suse > kernels, should we keep updating them, or just drop them in favour of > KVM? After all the Novell Marketing Hype you'll probably have to keep Xen ;-) Except for that I suspect a paravirt kvm or lhype might be the better hypervisor choice in the long term. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV