[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1222381254.27056.194.camel@bodhitayantram.eng.vmware.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:20:54 -0700
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Alok kataria <alokkataria1@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Yan Li <elliot.li.tech@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"joerg.roedel@....com" <joerg.roedel@....com>,
"rjmaomao@...il.com" <rjmaomao@...il.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Daniel Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] VMware detection support for x86 and x86-64
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:59 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> However, it is the particular use of this for detection use that is
> utterly damning. Using random I/O port probes for hardware detect
> should have disappeared in the early 1990's, and it's really disturbing
> that virtualization vendors -- not just VMWare -- are, in effect,
> re-making all the mistakes hardware vendors did in the 1980's.
It's not disturbing, it's expected. Re-using old broken solutions happens all the time, they can be perfectly valid in some contexts. The problem is that they tend to live on and evolve into a larger context where they break again. Surely we can do better, but how to do that isn't always clear-cut. DMI is a pretty good standard for this, but it still doesn't solve the problem in all contexts (userspace apps).
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