From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] virtio-serial: A guest <-> host interface for simple communication Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:59:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20090623145937.GB10690@redhat.com> References: <1245760953-32139-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com> <200906231355.53557.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Amit Shah , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Paul Brook Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200906231355.53557.paul@codesourcery.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:55:52PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote: > > Here are two patches. One implements a virtio-serial device in qemu > > and the other is the driver for a guest kernel. > > So I'll ask again. Why is this separate from virtio-console? In the guest I wouldn't want virtio-serial devices to be mixed up with the virtio-console device. virtio-console has nice clear usecase of being an interactive console, and as such the guest OS can & should automatically start a mingetty/agetty process on any virtio-console device it finds. If we use virtio-console for data channels to, then guest config becomes much harder todo automatically. By all means share underlying code/infrastructure where appropriate, but they must ultimately appear as clearly separate devices IMHO Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|