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]

Message-Id: <2D740A89-F53F-4F72-B44C-B72942E883E9@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:58:26 +0100
From:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@...hat.com>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
	LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kvm-devel General <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>,
	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 22.03.2010, at 20:54, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 
> * Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de> wrote:
> 
>> Yes. I think the point was that every layer in between brings potential 
>> slowdown and loss of features.
> 
> Exactly. The more 'fragmented' a project is into sub-projects, without a 
> single, unified, functional reference implementation in the center of it, the 
> longer it takes to fix 'unsexy' problems like trivial usability bugs.

I agree to that part. As previously stated there are few people working on qemu that would go and implement higher level things though. So some solution is needed there.

> Furthermore, another negative effect is that many times features are 
> implemented not in their technically best way, but in a way to keep them local 
> to the project that originates them. This is done to keep deployment latencies 
> and general contribution overhead down to a minimum. The moment you have to 
> work with yet another project, the overhead adds up.

I disagree there. Keeping things local and self-contained has been the UNIX secret. It works really well as long as the boundaries are well defined.

The problem we're facing is that we're simply lacking an active GUI / desktop user development community. We have desktop users, but nobody feels like tackling the issue of doing a great GUI project while talking to qemu-devel about his needs.

> So developers rather go for the quicker (yet inferior) hack within the 
> sub-project they have best access to.

Well - not necessarily hacks. It's more about project boundaries. Nothing is bad about that. You wouldn't want "ls" implemented in the Linux kernel either, right? :-)


Alex--
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/