[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200610222049.36338.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:49:36 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Kernel-based Virtual Machine
On Sunday 22 October 2006 20:41, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Ok, but if you radically change the kernel<->user API, doesn't that mean
> > you have to upgrade in the same way?
>
> No, why? I'd just upgrade the userspace. Am I misunderstanding you?
If you change the kernel interface, you also have to change the kernel
itself, at least if you introduce new syscalls.
> > The 32 bit emulation mode in x86_64
> > is actually pretty complete, so it probably boils down to a kernel
> > upgrade for you, without having to touch any of the user space.
> >
>
> For me personally, I don't mind. I don't know about others.
I'd really love to see your code in get into the mainline kernel,
but I'd consider 32 bit host support an unnecessary burden for
long-term maintenance. Maybe you could maintain the 32 bit version
out of tree as long as there is still interest? I would expect that
at least the point where it works out of the box on x86_64
distros is when it becomes completely obsolete.
Arnd <><
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists