linux-kernel - Re: [Alacrityvm-devel] [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 27 Dec 2009 08:39:29 -0500
From:	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Alacrityvm-devel] [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

On 12/27/09 8:27 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/27/2009 03:18 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> On 12/27/09 4:15 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>   
>>> On 12/23/2009 11:21 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>     
>>>> That said, you are still incorrect.  With what I proposed, the model
>>>> will run as an in-kernel vbus device, and no longer run in userspace.
>>>> It would therefore improve virtio-net as I stated, much in the same
>>>> way vhost-net or venet-tap do today.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> That can't work.  virtio-net has its own ABI on top of virtio, for
>>> example it prepends a header for TSO information.  Maybe if you disable
>>> all features it becomes compatible with venet, but that cripples it.
>>>
>>>      
>> You are confused.  The backend would be virtio-net specific, and would
>> therefore understand the virtio-net ABI.  It would support any feature
>> of virtio-net as long as it was implemented and negotiated by both sides
>> of the link.
>>    
> 
> Then we're back to square one.  A nice demonstration of vbus
> flexibility, but no help for virtio.
> 

No, where we are is at the point where we demonstrate that your original
statement that I did nothing to improve virtio was wrong.

-Greg


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (268 bytes)