From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KNUZx-0003CX-8u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:24:05 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KNUZw-0003B9-48
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:24:04 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35143 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KNUZw-0003AZ-0t
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:24:04 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:56020)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1KNUZv-0006SM-JK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:24:03 -0400
Message-ID: <488DE487.60902@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:23:51 +0200
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] merge some xen bits into qemu
References: <m2n.s.1KNSd3-002QXI@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
	<18573.51733.193631.369340@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<488DD8CE.3020508@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <488DD8CE.3020508@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I think it's more closely related to Xenite and Xenner.  Gerd: are you
> planning on folding in domain creation?  Right now it appears to be a
> helper launched after the domain creation.

Not sure yet.  Given that xen upstream most likely wouldn't follow a
xenite-like model I'm not sure how useful it would be.  Shouldn't be
that much extra code though, and as long as it is an opt-in upstream xen
should be happy too ...

> It
> seems like it could be used as almost a drop-in replacement for qemu-dm
> for PV guests.

Yes, that is the intention.

> HVM guests would require more work.

Yes.  Not addressed (yet).  hvm is more code, more invasive and I also
hope that Glauber Costa's work on a cpu abstraction layer (for
emulation/kqemu/kvm) makes it easier to add xen hvm to the picture.

cheers,
  Gerd

-- 
http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/