From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: KVM call minutes for Feb 1 Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 12:53:36 -0500 Message-ID: <20110201175336.GA22653@infradead.org> References: <20110201155414.GF28968@x200.localdomain> <4D48367D.2060802@siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Wright , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:40969 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752586Ab1BARxk (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 12:53:40 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D48367D.2060802@siemens.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > kvm_cpu_exec/kvm_run, and start wondering "What needs to be done to > upstream so that qemu-kvm could use that implementation?". If they > differ, the reasons need to be understood and patched away, either by > fixing/enhancing upstream or simplifying qemu-kvm. Once the upstream > changes are merged back, a qemu-kvm patch is posted to switch to that > version. while I'm not an expert in that area I really like you're approach. I'd really prefer to let you finish up all the major work that way before starting massive revamping like the glib main loop. Resolving the qemu/qemu-kvm schisma surely is more important for the overall project than rewriting existing functionality to look a little nicer.