From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LzaRd-0002Ak-OT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:53:13 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LzaRZ-00028r-9g
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:53:13 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46016 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LzaRZ-00028k-0D
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:53:09 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56060)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1LzaRY-00041t-GU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:53:08 -0400
Message-ID: <49F9E507.3010509@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:51:03 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 9/9] Introduce VLANClientState::cleanup()
References: <1239812969-8320-2-git-send-email-markmc@redhat.com>
	<49F9D3D8.3000704@us.ibm.com> <49F9D4A1.7070005@us.ibm.com>
	<200904301758.38231.paul@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200904301758.38231.paul@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>

Paul Brook wrote:
>> No one has complained yet to 
>> the best of my knowledge that you can't have more than one guest device
>> on a vlan in KVM.  This is simply because no one ever does it :-)
>>     
>
> I'm not so sure about that. I don't believe kvm is representative of qemu as a 
> whole. 

I agree with this, but...

> My guess is your typical kvm user cares more about netwroking 
> performance then they do about (for example) requiring root privileges to 
> instantiate virtual machines.
>   

In fact kvm discourages root privileges; that's why I like fd= options, 
and want them supported on the monitor (via SCM_RIGHTS).

> That said, I guess vlan functionality can be punted to something like vde.
>   

Yes please.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.