From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: KVM call minutes for Feb 1 Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 10:53:47 -0600 Message-ID: <4D483A9B.9000205@codemonkey.ws> References: <20110201155414.GF28968@x200.localdomain> <4D48367D.2060802@siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Chris Wright , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:60476 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751439Ab1BAQxu (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:53:50 -0500 Received: by iyj18 with SMTP id 18so6138606iyj.19 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 08:53:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4D48367D.2060802@siemens.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/01/2011 10:36 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2011-02-01 16:54, Chris Wright wrote: > >> KVM upstream merge: status, plans, coordination >> - Jan has a git tree, consolidating >> - qemu-kvm io threading is still an issue >> - Anthony wants to just merge >> - concerns with non-x86 arch and merge >> - concerns with big-bang patch merge and following stability >> - post 0.14 conversion to glib mainloop, non-upstreamed qemu-kvm will be >> a problem if it's not there by then >> - testing and nuances are still an issue (e.g. stefan berger's mmio read issue) >> - qemu-kvm still evolving, needs to get sync'd or it will keep diverging >> - 2 implementations of main init, cpu init, Jan has merged them into one >> - qemu-kvm-x86.c file that's only a few hundred lines >> - review as one patch to see the fundamental difference >> > More precisely, my current work flow is to pick some function(s), e.g. > 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. > > Any help will be welcome, either via review of my subtle regressions or > on resolving concrete differences. > > E.g. posix-aio-compat.c: Why does qemu-kvm differ here? If it's because > of its own iothread code, can we wrap that away or do we need to > consolidate the threading code first? Or do we need to fix something in > upstream? > I bet it's the eventfd thing. It's arbitrary. If you've got a small diff post your series, I'd be happy to take a look at it and see what I can explain. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Jan > >