[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45ED3A8D.9090906@argo.co.il>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 11:55:25 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...o.co.il>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...e.de>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
virtualization <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Xen & VMI?
Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Oh, and btw: What was the reason why kvm paravirtualization doesn't use
> the vmi interface?
>
>
There actually was proof of concept code to do just that (by Anthony
Liguori). For Linux, I feel paravirt_ops is superior as we can extend
it if something is missing. If VMI is adopted by non-Linux guests, we
may support it as a quick way to add paravirt support for those guests.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
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