From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Native Linux KVM tool for 3.1 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:36:39 +0300 Message-ID: <4E2D1D07.9020009@redhat.com> References: <4E2CC489.1090509@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anthony Liguori , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, gorcunov@gmail.com, levinsasha928@gmail.com, asias.hejun@gmail.com, prasadjoshi124@gmail.com To: Pekka Enberg Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/25/2011 10:27 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Anthony, > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > lguest already does this and lives in the kernel. > > Does Lguest have SMP, usermode networking, and GUI support? > IIRC, yes, no, and no. > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > So purely from a kernel perspective, why have two tools in the tree that do > > the same thing? Shouldn't you at least unify the userspace with the lguest > > userspace? > > Are you talking about Documentation/lguest/lguest.c? How would you > suggest we unify our code with that? It should be easy to have tools/kvm drive lguest - they're both virtio based. All you need to do is provide yet another ops structure to drive the two ABIs. I guess lguest.c has to remain, as point of lguest was a simple teaching aid for virtualization (which doesn't work very well, as the techniques it uses are obsolete). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function