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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <200704031126.52750.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 3 Apr 2007 11:26:52 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Christian Borntraeger <borntrae@...ibm.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	mathiasen@...il.com
Subject: Re: A set of "standard" virtual devices?

> 
> On s390, it would be more than strangeness. There's no implementation
> of PCI at all, someone would have to cook it up - and it wouldn't have
> any use beyond those special devices. Since there isn't any bus type
> that is available on *all* architectures, a generic "virtual" bus with
> very simple probing seems much saner...

You just have to change all the distribution installers then. 
Ok I suppose on s390 that's not that big issue because there are not
that many for s390. But for x86 there exist quite a lot. I suppose
it's easier to change it in the kernel.

-Andi
-
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/