From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Dike Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move KVM, paravirt, lguest, VMI and Xen under arch-level Virtualization option Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:09:06 -0400 Message-ID: <20070720140906.GB6534@c2.user-mode-linux.org> References: <1184905342.10380.263.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46A046F1.7040207@qumranet.com> <1184911347.10380.274.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46A051EE.7060304@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46A051EE.7060304@vmware.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Zachary Amsden Cc: Jeff Dike , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , virtualization , Andi Kleen , Linus Torvalds List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:10:54PM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote: > I'm rather indifferent on the matter, but I think a virtualization menu > under UML would be very confusing. Yeah, that would be interesting. Trying to get one menu, with switches that the arch can turn on and off, seems to make sense if you can get away without too many switches. Jeff -- Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com