From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
To: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>, Dor Laor <dlaor@redhat.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: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:29:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D6F97C4.7010100@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D6E4B03.6000105@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 03/02/11 14:49, Michael Roth wrote:
> On 03/02/2011 07:18 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> I think we need two types for sure, even for the video case, we will
>> still need a control channel as well. However, I don't think it is
>> desirable to split things up more than we have to, so if we can keep it
>> within one client process that is good. Maybe there are cases where it
>> makes sense to split it into more processes, I could be convinced, but I
>> think we really need to be careful making it too much of a complex mess
>> either.
>
> Yup, if it's doable I'd prefer a single client process as well. Just
> hard to predict how difficult it'll be to support 2 or more mechanisms.
> Although, I'd imagine we'd end up with something like qemu's io loop,
> with event-driven shmem and fd-based work, which does seem doable.
That is pretty much what I had in mind. Will have to see how it works
out, but I think it is very feasible :)
Cheers,
Jes
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-03 13:30 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
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 [this message]
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=4D6F97C4.7010100@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).