linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

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: <4B30F214.80206@codemonkey.ws>
Date:	Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:21:40 -0600
From:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

On 12/22/2009 10:01 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> new e1000 driver is more superior in architecture and do the required
>> work to make the new e1000 driver a full replacement for the old one.
>>      
> Right, like everyone actually does things this way..
>
> I wonder why do we have OSS, old Firewire and IDE stacks still around then?
>    

And it's always a source of pain, isn't it.

>>> I also personally don't see a big problem in having another set of
>>> virtual drivers -- Linux already has plenty (vmware, xen, virtio, power,
>>> s390-vm, ...) and it's not that they would be a particular maintenance
>>> burden impacting the kernel core.
>>>        
> Exactly, I also don't see any problem here, especially since AlacrityVM
> drivers have much cleaner design / internal architecture than some of their
> competitors..
>    

Care to provide some actual objective argument to why it's better than 
what we already have?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

--
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/