From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932305Ab1KDNOj (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:14:39 -0400 Received: from 8bytes.org ([88.198.83.132]:59073 "EHLO 8bytes.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753074Ab1KDNOi (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:14:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 14:14:36 +0100 From: Joerg Roedel To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , Avi Kivity , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC/GIT PULL] Linux KVM tool for v3.2 Message-ID: <20111104131436.GN1512@8bytes.org> References: <20111104121601.GA15206@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 02:35:18PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > We are reusing kernel code and headers and I am not interested in > copying them over. Living in the kernel tree is part of the design, > whether you like it or not. Besides that the KVM tool with its small and clean code-base is a really nice reference on how to use the KVM kernel interface for anyone willing to implement its own user-space. As a developer you can learn a lot more from it as by reading the files on Documentation/. So I think it should definitly be part of the kernel source tree. Whether it lives in tools/ or Documentation/ ... I don't care. In tools/ is certainly better for all the developers already using the it for testing their kernels. Regards, Joerg