From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KFuG6-00052e-7F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:12:14 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KFuG4-00052S-HI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:12:13 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34135 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KFuG4-00052P-De
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:12:12 -0400
Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:48136)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1KFuG3-00030m-Tv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:12:12 -0400
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 18:12:07 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: QEMU Accel - git tree
Message-ID: <20080707171207.GB7707@shareable.org>
References: <5d6222a80807041340j367cfe3ah67a9d771caa0ee63@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080704213844.GB29672@tapir>
	<5d6222a80807041427t5510c2f5y172b3674697728ef@mail.gmail.com>
	<48721138.1010908@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48721138.1010908@redhat.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>, Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@us.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
> > Talking to hollis last week, he pointed out that a better solution
> > would be to make all of them to use the same kernel interface. It's a
> > valid approach, but I believe an user-space interface would be more
> > flexible. That's why I'm still maintaining this set (now in tree-form
> > ;-) )
> 
> Especially in case we'll add xen to the picture ...

However, don't forget that plain QEMU doesn't use a kernel interface.
Does that count as a "different" kernel interface for the purpose of
these hooks? :-)

-- Jamie