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: <4B3729ED.50006@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:33:33 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, 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 12/24/2009 11:36 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> As a twist on this, the VMware paravirt driver interface is so
>> hardware-like that they're getting hardware vendors to supply cards that
>> implement it.  Try that with a pure software approach.
>>      
> Any hardware engineer (myself included) will tell you that, generally
> speaking, what you can do in hardware you can do in software (think of
> what QEMU does today, for instance).  It's purely a cost/performance
> tradeoff.
>
> I can at least tell you that is true of vbus.  Anything on the vbus side
> would be equally eligible for a hardware implementation, though there is
> not reason to do this today since we have equivalent functionality in
> baremetal already.

There's a huge difference in the probability of vmware getting cards to 
their spec, or x86 vendors improving interrupt delivery to guests, 
compared to vbus being implemented in hardware.

> The only motiviation is if you wanted to preserve
> ABI etc, which is what vmware is presumably after.  However, I am not
> advocating this as necessary at this juncture.
>    

Maybe AlacrityVM users don't care about compatibility, but my users do.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/