[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BA67F12.6030501@nagafix.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:18:26 +0700
From: Antoine Martin <antoine@...afix.co.uk>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
oerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>, ziteng.huang@...el.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single
project
On 03/22/2010 03:11 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 03/21/2010 10:08 PM, Olivier Galibert wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:01:51PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 03/21/2010 09:17 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>> Adding any new daemon to an existing guest is a deployment and
>>>> usability
>>>> nightmare.
>>>>
>>> The logical conclusion of that is that everything should be built into
>>> the kernel. Where a failure brings the system down or worse. Where
>>> you
>>> have to bear the memory footprint whether you ever use the
>>> functionality
>>> or not. Where to update the functionality you need to deploy a new
>>> kernel (possibly introducing unrelated bugs) and reboot.
>>>
>>> If userspace daemons are such a deployment and usability nightmare,
>>> maybe we should fix that instead.
>> Which userspace? Deploying *anything* in the guest can be a
>> nightmare, including paravirt drivers if you don't have a natively
>> supported in the OS virtual hardware backoff.
>
> That includes the guest kernel. If you can deploy a new kernel in the
> guest, presumably you can deploy a userspace package.
That's not always true.
The host admin can control the guest kernel via "kvm -kernel" easily
enough, but he may or may not have access to the disk that is used in
the guest. (think encrypted disks, service agreements, etc)
Antoine
>> Deploying things in the
>> host OTOH is business as usual.
>
> True.
>
>> And you're smart enough to know that.
>
> Thanks.
>
--
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