From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752068AbYKZNHV (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:07:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752256AbYKZNHE (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:07:04 -0500 Received: from cet.com.ru ([195.178.208.66]:34149 "EHLO tservice.net.ru" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752044AbYKZNHD (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:07:03 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:07:01 +0300 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Gleb Natapov Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Host<->guest channel interface advice needed Message-ID: <20081126130701.GB8921@ioremap.net> References: <20081126123919.GC3521@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081126123919.GC3521@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Gleb. On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 02:39:19PM +0200, Gleb Natapov (gleb@redhat.com) wrote: > The interfaces that are being considered are netlink socket (only datagram > semantics, linux specific), new socket family or character device with > different minor number for each channel. Which one better suits for > the purpose? Is there other kind of interface to consider? New socket > family looks like a good choice, but it would be nice to hear other > opinions before starting to work on it. What about X (or whatever else) protocol running over host-guest network device, which are in the kernel already? -- Evgeniy Polyakov