From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ45Y-0002VI-2m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:43:20 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ45V-0002V3-Lo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:43:18 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39074 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ45V-0002V0-CY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:43:17 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.226]:2968) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KQ45V-0000PL-1F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:43:17 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c46so1744123wra.18 for ; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48973F8E.8080109@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:42:38 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] merge some xen bits into qemu References: <1217865045-10722-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1217865045-10722-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Jackson , Gerd Hoffmann , Samuel Thibault Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi folks, > > xen support is implemented using another machine type. xen's qemu-dm > already uses the machine type to switch between paravirtualized and > fully virtualized machines, so this was the natural choice. qemu has > gets a new "xenpv" machine type additionally to the "pc" and "isapc" > ones. > > Comments? > Modulo some of the stylistic feedback that needs to be addressed, I think these series looks pretty good. It fits pretty well into QEMU. Unless there are major objections, I'll apply an updated series once people have had some time to look through it. However, I'd like to see agreement within the Xen community that this is the right approach first. In particular, I would like to see these patches either merged with upstream Xen or for upstream Xen to plan to rebase against QEMU to pick them up and use them for PV support. This doesn't mean they have to use the block and net backends of course. I really don't want to support two implementations of Xen support in QEMU. Regards, Anthony Liguori > cheers, > Gerd > > > >