From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:59:52 -0500
Message-ID: <20110408105952.5e7c2ffb@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
References: <1301592656.586.15.camel@jaguar>
	<4D982E89.8070502@redhat.com>
	<BANLkTinbCAUqaKfmKaj-7GXTh9F2if0x+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D9847BC.9060906@redhat.com>
	<4D98716D.9040307@codemonkey.ws>
	<4D9873CD.3080207@redhat.com>
	<20110406093333.GB6465@elte.hu>
	<4D9E6F6E.9050709@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	<mtosatti@redhat.com>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
	<penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, <asias.hejun@gmail.com>,
	<gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D9E6F6E.9050709@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:14:06 -0500
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:

> If someone was going to seriously go about doing something like this, a 
> better approach would be to start with QEMU and remove anything non-x86 
> and all of the UI/command line/management bits and start there.
> 
> There's nothing more I'd like to see than a viable alternative to QEMU 
> but ignoring any of the architectural mistakes in QEMU and repeating 
> them in a new project isn't going to get there.

Supporting only a single architecture sounds like a significant
architectural mistake...  only x86 deserves clean code?

-Scott