From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755630AbZE2Gi4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:38:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753878AbZE2Gis (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:38:48 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:52911 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753848AbZE2Gir (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:38:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Xen is a feature From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput To: David Miller Cc: jeremy@goop.org, mingo@elte.hu, dan.magenheimer@oracle.com, avi@redhat.com, George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, gregkh@suse.de, kurt.hackel@oracle.com, Ian.Pratt@citrix.com, xen-users@lists.xensource.com, ksrinivasan@novell.com, EAnderson@novell.com, wimcoekaerts@wimmekes.net, stephen.spector@citrix.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, npiggin@suse.de In-Reply-To: <20090528.210559.137121893.davem@davemloft.net> References: <162f4c90-6431-4a2a-b337-6d7451d7b11e@default> <20090528001350.GD26820@elte.hu> <4A1F302E.8030501@goop.org> <20090528.210559.137121893.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 12:07:32 +0530 Message-Id: <1243579052.3159.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 (2.24.5-1.fc10) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Dave, On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 21:05 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge > Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 17:45:34 -0700 > > > Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> Xen changes - especially dom0 - are overwhelmingly not about improving > >> Linux, but about having some special hook and extra treatment in > >> random places - and that's really bad. > >> > > > > You've made this argument a few times now, and I take exception to it. > > > > It seems to be predicated on the idea that Xen has some kind of niche > > usage, with barely more users than Voyager. Or that it is a parasite > > sitting on the side of Linux, being a pure drain. > > I don't see Ingo's comments, whether I agree with them or not, as > an implication of Xen being niche. Rather I see his comments as > an opposition to how Xen is implemented. > You can see Ingo's comments and whole thread under subject : Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen APIC hooks (with io_apic_ops) http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/27/758 -- JSR