Re: [PATCH/RFC 7/9] Virtual network guest device driver

Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-23T12:20:02Z

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 03:16:50PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:00:42AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/22/07, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I'm not opposed to supporting emulation environments, just don't make
> >>> a large pile of crap the default like Xen -- and having to integrate
> >>> PCI probing code in my guest domains is a large pile of crap.
> >>>
> >> Exactly. I'm about to start a pretty large project here, using xen or
> >> kvm, not sure. One thing for sure, we are NOT going to use anything
> >> but PV devices. Full emulation is nice, but it's just plain silly if
> >> you don't have to do it. And we don't have to do it. So let's get the
> >> PV devices right, not try to shoehorn them into some framework like
> >> PCI.
> >>
> >
> > If you don't care about full virtualization kvm is the wrong project for
> > you. You might want to take a look at lguest.
> >
> >
>
> This is incorrect. While kvm started out as a full virtualization
> project, it will expand with I/O PV and core PV. Eventually most of the
> paravirt_ops interface will have a kvm implementation.

The statement above was a little misworded I think. It should have
been a "if you care about pure PV ..."