From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/21] Kemari for KVM 0.2 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:00:42 +0000 Message-ID: <201011291300.43082.paul@codesourcery.com> References: <1290665220-26478-1-git-send-email-tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Yoshiaki Tamura , ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp, mtosatti@redhat.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, dlaor@redhat.com, aliguori@us.ibm.com, Blue Swirl , avi@redhat.com, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, psuriset@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ananth@in.ibm.com To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Return-path: Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([38.113.113.100]:58945 "EHLO mail.codesourcery.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753885Ab0K2NBC (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:01:02 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > >> Could you formulate the constraints so developers are aware of them in > >> the future and can protect the codebase. How about expanding the > >> Kemari wiki pages? > > > > If you like the idea above, I'm happy to make the list also on > > the wiki page. > > Here's a different question: what requirements must an emulated device > meet in order to be added to the Kemari supported whitelist? That's > what I want to know so that I don't break existing devices and can add > new devices that work with Kemari :). Why isn't it completely device agnostic? i.e. if a device has to care about Kemari at all (of vice-versa) then IMO you're doing it wrong. The whole point of the internal block/net APIs is that they isolate the host implementation details from the device emulation. Paul