linux-kernel - Re: A set of "standard" virtual devices?

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: <46117DE9.6060506@goop.org>
Date:	Mon, 02 Apr 2007 15:04:25 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	mathiasen@...il.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: A set of "standard" virtual devices?

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> The actual PCI bus could paravirtualized.  It's just a question of
> whether one reinvents a device discovery mechanism (like XenBus) or
> whether one piggy backs on existing mechanisms.
>
> Furthermore, in the future, I strongly suspect that HVM will become
> much more important for Xen than PV and since that already has a PCI
> bus it's not really that big of a deal. 

Well, obviously it keeps things simple for me to not worry about PCI
support in Xen at this point.  But I was thinking more of lguest; I
think PCI emulation would kill puppies.

    J
-
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/