From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Jr2dl-0004Ze-Iu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:05:53 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Jr2dj-0004ZS-CH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:05:52 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60110 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jr2dj-0004ZP-8o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:05:51 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gcosta@redhat.com>) id 1Jr2di-0003co-R0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:05:50 -0400
Message-ID: <4817E082.2060908@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:59:14 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <12094981963747-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com>	<4817A257.7000800@qumranet.com>
	<4817B0C8.8080301@redhat.com> <4817BD06.5020909@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4817BD06.5020909@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] [RFC] try to reduce kvm impact
 in core qemu code.
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: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>  
>>> Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Hi. This is a proposal for reducing the impact of kvm functions in 
>>>> core qemu
>>>> code. This is by all means not ready, but I felt like posting it, so 
>>>> a discussion
>>>> on it could follow.
>>>>
>>>> The idea in this patch is to replace the specific kvm details from 
>>>> core qemu files
>>>> like vl.c, with driver_yyy() functions. When kvm is not running, 
>>>> those functions would
>>>> just return (most of time), absolutely reducing the impact of kvm code.
>>>>
>>>> As I wanted to test it, in this patch I changed the kvm functions to 
>>>> be called driver_yyy(),
>>>> but that's not my final goal. I intend to use a function pointer 
>>>> schema, similar to what the linux
>>>> kernel already do for a lot of its subsystem, to isolate the changes.
>>>>
>>>> Comments deeply welcome.
>>>>         
>>> While I would be very annoyed if someone referred to kvm as a qemu 
>>> accelerator, I think accelerator_yyy() is more descriptive than 
>>> driver_yyy().
>>>     
>> How about booster? ;-)
>>   
> 
> I don't think the concern from a QEMU perspective is that QEMU is too 
> intimately tied to KVM.  The concern is that overtime, it will be very 
> difficult to make changes to QEMU without breaking KVM support because 
> of the shear number of hooks we require.  Fabrice had actually suggested 
> merging libkvm into QEMU.  We just need to reduce the overall number of 
> if (kvm_enabled()) blocks.

They are not mutually exclusive. Even if we do merge libkvm into qemu, 
having it more modular and separated will be way better than having kvm 
hooks all over.