From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Wolf Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:13:04 +0100 Message-ID: <4BA89430.7060404@redhat.com> References: <20100322124428.GA12475@elte.hu> <4BA76810.4040609@redhat.com> <20100322143212.GE14201@elte.hu> <4BA7821C.7090900@codemonkey.ws> <20100322155505.GA18796@elte.hu> <4BA796DF.7090005@redhat.com> <20100322165107.GD18796@elte.hu> <4BA7A406.9050203@redhat.com> <20100322173400.GB15795@elte.hu> <4BA7B9E0.5080009@codemonkey.ws> <20100322192739.GE21919@elte.hu> <4BA7C96D.2020702@redhat.com> <4BA7E9D9.5060800@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , Ingo Molnar , Pekka Enberg , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Peter Zijlstra , Sheng Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , oerg Roedel , Jes Sorensen , Gleb Natapov , Zachary Amsden , ziteng.huang@intel.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Fr?d?ric Weisbecker , Gregory Haskins To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BA7E9D9.5060800@codemonkey.ws> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Am 22.03.2010 23:06, schrieb Anthony Liguori: > On 03/22/2010 02:47 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: >> Having qemu enumerate guests one way or another is not a good idea IMO >> since it is focused on one guest and doesn't have a system-wide entity. > > There always needs to be a system wide entity. There are two ways to > enumerate instances from that system wide entity. You can centralize > the creation of instances and there by maintain an list of current > instances. You can also allow instances to be created in a > decentralized manner and provide a standard mechanism for instances to > register themselves with the system wide entity. > > IOW, it's the difference between asking libvirtd to exec(qemu) vs > allowing a user to exec(qemu) and having qemu connect to a well known > unix domain socket for libvirt to tell libvirtd that it exists. I think the latter is exactly what I would want for myself. I do see the advantages of having a central instance, but I really don't want to bother with libvirt configuration files or even GUIs just to get an ad-hoc VM up when I can simply run "qemu -hda hd.img -m 1024". Let alone that I usually want to have full control over qemu, including monitor access and small details available as command line options. I know that I'm not the average user with these requirements, but still I am one user and do have these requirements. If I could just install libvirt, continue using qemu as I always did and libvirt picked my VMs up for things like global enumeration, that would be more or less the optimal thing for me. Kevin