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]
Message-ID: <45EE2079.1060200@vmware.com>
Date:	Tue, 06 Mar 2007 18:16:25 -0800
From:	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	virtualization <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Xen & VMI?

Ingo Molnar wrote:

> We do not let OpenOffice or Evolution have its own separate ABI to Linux 
> so that they 'can evolve at their own pace'... We want them to cooperate 
> and come up with a common ABI (or rather, we try to come up with the 
> right syscalls ourselves), because divering, overlapping ABIs are a huge 
> PITA.
>   

OpenOffice or Evolution are the completely wrong example.  They disprove 
your point more than they prove it.  Consider any significantly large 
cross-platform software like OpenOffice, Evolution, Firefox.  You don't 
let or restrict what these pieces of software do at all.  They evolve at 
their own pace, and they all build their very complicated and divergent 
cross platform compatibility layers, with huge, overlapping APIs, 
converging in places, diverging in others.

> We do not unify their pointlessly diverging ABIs to within the kernel 
> via say office_ops (while we could) because that's crappy on its face. 
> Hypervisors arent in any way different, they just _think_ they are 
> special because they are relatively new. But hey, i dont expect you to 
> concede this point ;)

No, you don't.  The developers of Office and Evolution and Firefox do 
that for you.  And it's not crappy on its face because it provides real 
value to them - the ability to run heterogeneously in multiple different 
environments and across many different platforms and operating systems.

Where your analogy is wrong is that in this case, Linux is very much 
like one of those large software systems.  It has complicated features 
that require special plugins to work efficiently in different hypervisor 
environments.  And paravirt-ops is providing that functionality to 
Linux, just as the platform layer of any large software system does and 
very much should do.

Zach
-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ