[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D9F9359.20708@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:59:37 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mtosatti@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, joro@...tes.org,
penberg@...helsinki.fi, asias.hejun@...il.com, gorcunov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool
On 04/08/2011 02:20 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
>
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 09:00:43AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> An example is ioport_ops. This maps directly to
>> ioport_{read,write}_table in QEMU. Then you use ioport__register() to
>> register entries in this table similar register_ioport_{read,write}() in
>> QEMU.
>>
>> The use of a struct is a small improvement but the fundamental design is
>> flawed because it models a view of hardware where all devices are
>> directly connected to the CPU. This is not how hardware works at all.
> Not sure if I've the whole picture on this but I see no answer to your
> email and I found your remark above the most interesting. This is
> because I thought the whole point of a native kvm tool was to go all
> the paravirt way to provide max performance and maybe also depend on
> vhost as much as possible.
Yeah, if that's the goal, skip all the mini-BIOS junk and just rely on a
PV kernel in the guest.
I think a mini userspace that assumes that we can change the guest
kernel and avoids having a ton of complexity to do things like CMOS
emulation would be a really interesting thing to do.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists