Re: [GIT PULL] Native Linux KVM tool for 3.1

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi Alexander,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:

> >> Same here - in fact i first asked Qemu to be put into 
> >> tools/qemu/ so that it all becomes more hackable and more usable 
> >> - that suggestion was rebuked very strongly.
> >
> > So instead of thinking a bit and trying to realize that there 
> > might be a reason people don't want all their user space in the 
> > kernel tree you go ahead and start your own crusade of creating a 
> > new user space. Great. That's how I always hoped Linux would be 
> > :(.
> 
> Damn you Ingo Molnar, I knew you'd somehow get all the credit for 
> our hard work! ;-)

Yeah, i'm really just a user and code reviewer of tools/kvm/, in 
terms of actual commits i'm barely on the radar compared to the 
massive contributions of Pekka, Sasha, Asias, Cyrill and others.

> More seriously, though, I fail to see what's bothering you 
> Alexander. I and Ingo already mentioned we wouldn't be hacking on 
> Qemu even if there wasn't no tools/kvm. It's not as if we're 
> putting *your* user space code into the kernel tree - we wrote our 
> own! What's wrong with that?

That puzzles me as well.

If tools/kvm/ is really such a bad approach then it will just wither 
and die, like one of the thousand stale drivers we have in the kernel 
- or like lguest it ends up as a cool hack that didnt quite make it.

Judging by the many contributions tools/kvm/ has already attracted in 
its limited form an out of tree project i'd not bet on that outcome 
though.

Thanks,

	Ingo