linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project

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]

Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:33:45 -0500
From:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
To:	"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@...hat.com>
CC:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	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>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single
 project

On 03/22/2010 02:31 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:15:35PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>    
>> On 03/22/2010 12:55 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>      
>>>> Lets look at the ${HOME}/.qemu/qmp/ enumeration method suggested by
>>>> Anthony.
>>>> There's numerous ways that this can break:
>>>>          
>>> I don't like it either.  We have libvirt for enumerating guests.
>>>        
>> We're stuck in a rut with libvirt and I think a lot of the
>> dissatisfaction with qemu is rooted in that.  It's not libvirt that's
>> the probably, but the relationship between qemu and libvirt.
>>
>> We add a feature to qemu and maybe after six month it gets exposed by
>> libvirt.  Release time lines of the two projects complicate the
>> situation further.  People that write GUIs are limited by libvirt
>> because that's what they're told to use and when they need something
>> simple, they're presented with first getting that feature implemented in
>> qemu, then plumbed through libvirt.
>>      
> That is somewhat unfair as a blanket statement!
>    

Sorry, you're certainly correct.  Some features appear quickly, but 
others can take an awfully long time.

>> It wouldn't be so bad if libvirt was basically a passthrough interface
>> to qemu but it tries to model everything in a generic way which is more
>> or less doomed to fail when you're adding lots of new features (as we are).
>>
>> The list of things that libvirt doesn't support and won't any time soon
>> is staggering.
>>      
> As previously discussed, we want to improve both the set of features
> supported, and make it much easier to support new features promptly.
> The QMP&  qdev stuff has been a very good step forward in making it
> easier to support QEMU management. There have been a proposals from
> several people, yourself included, on how to improve libvirt's support
> for the full range of QEMU features. We're committed to looking at this
> and figuring out which proposals are practical to support, so we can
> improve QEMU&  libvirt interaction for everyone.
>    

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Regards,
> Daniel
>    

--
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/