From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
To: dlaor@redhat.com
Cc: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>,
Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU: Discussion of separating core functionality vs supportive features
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:21:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D6E1A25.3070501@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D6CE170.6060108@redhat.com>
On 03/01/11 13:07, Dor Laor wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 07:44 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> I'm very nervous about having a large number of daemons necessary to run
>> QEMU. I think a reasonable approach would be a single front-end daemond.
>
> s/daemon/son processes/
> Qemu is the one that should spawn them and they should be transparent
> from the management. This way running qemu stays the same and qemu just
> need to add the logic to get a SIGCHILD and potentially re-execute an
> dead son process.
I disagree here, I do not want to require QEMU to spawn the new
processes. Having a daemon you can use to connect will provide more
flexibility and isn't unreasonably complex.
Cheers,
Jes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-02 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-28 16:42 [Qemu-devel] QEMU: Discussion of separating core functionality vs supportive features Jes Sorensen
2011-02-28 17:44 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-03-01 12:07 ` Dor Laor
2011-03-01 12:40 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-03-01 14:25 ` Dor Laor
2011-03-01 14:29 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-03-02 10:25 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 10:56 ` Dor Laor
2011-03-02 11:02 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 10:58 ` Alon Levy
2011-03-02 11:04 ` Dor Laor
2011-03-02 12:39 ` Alon Levy
2011-04-26 9:14 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2011-04-26 13:15 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-03-02 11:05 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 10:28 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 10:42 ` Dor Laor
2011-03-02 10:47 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 10:21 ` Jes Sorensen [this message]
2011-03-02 10:19 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 13:13 ` Michael Roth
2011-03-02 13:18 ` Jes Sorensen
2011-03-02 13:49 ` Michael Roth
2011-03-03 13:29 ` Jes Sorensen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D6E1A25.3070501@redhat.com \
--to=jes.sorensen@redhat.com \
--cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
--cc=aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=amit.shah@redhat.com \
--cc=dlaor@redhat.com \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).