From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [PATCH/PFC 0/2] s390 host support Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:11:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20070429081157.GC8332@osiris.ibm.com> References: <1177681224.5770.20.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <4632E94C.20904@qumranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org" , cborntra-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, schwidefsky-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4632E94C.20904-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@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 > > We intend to move to a common arch-independent kernel interface and > > userspace with kvm. > The address space and vcpu management are rather different from kvm's, > however your approach is better and we'll want to move kvm in your > direction rather than the other way round (specifically the tight vcpu > <-> task coupling; mmu is more diffcult). How do we continue from here? Adding new architectures to the ioctl based approach or change kvm to a syscall interface? Also IMHO it would be better to move the code away from drivers and to kernel/ or virt/ with arch dependent backends. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/