[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46A051EE.7060304@vmware.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:10:54 -0700
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>,
lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@....de>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move KVM, paravirt, lguest, VMI and Xen under arch-level
Virtualization option
Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Otherwise we end up with $NARCH copies of that Kconfig, each slightly
>> different. The top-level entry can be made to depend on the archs that
>> actually have some virt capability, so as not to show empty an menu.
>>
>
> I dislike the duplication, too, but
>
> 1) it's a CPU capability, and that's where it belongs in the menu.
> 2) And as you can see from the difference between the x86_64 and i386
> help text, there are real platform differences (and not mentioning
> what's under the menu would be kinda cheating).
> 3) Virtualization doesn't even make sense as an option for some
> platforms where it's always on.
>
I'm rather indifferent on the matter, but I think a virtualization menu
under UML would be very confusing.
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