From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iaGUI-0001zx-Ca for linux-um@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 09:53:28 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id t8so11314309plr.8 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 01:53:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 18:53:18 +0900 Message-ID: From: Hajime Tazaki Subject: Re: [RFC v2 17/37] lkl tools: host lib: virtio devices In-Reply-To: <48783237.99334.1574864917843.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> References: <1662825264.98055.1574758225905.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> <4ebb14dc67ccb70543617ce1f7066f3f27cd11a8.camel@sipsolutions.net> <243342257.98153.1574762974057.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> <98acf77a7c6f6cba7f76c12a850ac2929b9e5a48.camel@sipsolutions.net> <293078386.98317.1574784295793.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> <48783237.99334.1574864917843.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "linux-um" Errors-To: linux-um-bounces+geert=linux-m68k.org@lists.infradead.org To: richard@nod.at Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, cem@freebsd.org, tavi.purdila@gmail.com, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, retrage01@gmail.com, pscollins@google.com, linux-kernel-library@freelists.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net, sigmaepsilon92@gmail.com, liuyuan@google.com, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 23:28:37 +0900, Richard Weinberger wrote: > = > ----- Urspr=FCngliche Mail ----- > >> Can you please point out a little further why UML's net or block drive= rs > >> are not usable for LKL? > > = > > I think we can do it (but need to check). > > = > > LKL may use UML's drivers, and UML can also use LKL's devices/drivers > > (as my 36/37 and 37/37 patches do, though the patches has no careful > > consideration on IRQ handling). > = > Of course. So please don't get me wrong, I don't want LKL to become > UML. I hope that UML can also benefit from LKL. I understand, let me play with the UML code for a while. -- Hajime _______________________________________________ linux-um mailing list linux-um@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um