From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [RFC/GIT PULL] Linux KVM tool for v3.2 Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:47:28 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4EBB4A21.20707@codemonkey.ws> <4EBBD503.4020308@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Anthony Liguori , Linus Torvalds , Avi Kivity , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig To: Pekka Enberg Return-path: In-Reply-To: (Pekka Enberg's message of "Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:56:17 +0200") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Pekka Enberg writes: > Hi Anthony, > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> It's not just the qcow2 implementation or even the block layer. =C2=A0= This pull >> requests adds a userspace TCP/IP stack to the kernel and yet netdev = isn't on >> the CC and there are no Ack's from anyone from the networking stack.= =C2=A0I'm >> fairly sure if they knew what was happening here they would object. > > It's something we consider extremely important because it allows easy > non-root networking. But you're right, we definitely ought to ping th= e > networking folks before the next merge window. The problem is real. The solution "duplicate in user space" sucks. If you engaging with the kernel networking folks leads to one that doesn't suck, we should bathe you in free beer.