From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755498AbZE2GvT (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:51:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752889AbZE2GvM (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:51:12 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:48651 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752583AbZE2GvL (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 02:51:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 23:51:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20090528.235110.44572184.davem@davemloft.net> To: jaswinder@kernel.org 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 Subject: Re: Xen is a feature From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1243579052.3159.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <4A1F302E.8030501@goop.org> <20090528.210559.137121893.davem@davemloft.net> <1243579052.3159.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.2.51 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 12:07:32 +0530 > 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 Jeremy is specifically commenting on Ingo's quoted "argument". And that "argument" is what he takes "exception to". And that's the scope of what I'm commenting on too.