linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Native Linux KVM tool for 3.1

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1311580201.3446.30.camel@lappy>
Date:	Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:50:01 +0300
From:	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
To:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, avi@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	gorcunov@...il.com, asias.hejun@...il.com, prasadjoshi124@...il.com
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Native Linux KVM tool for 3.1

On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 01:12 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-07-24 22:37, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > Hi Linus,
> > 
> > Please consider pulling from
> > 
> >   ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/penberg/linux.git
> > kvm-tool-for-linus
> > 
> > to merge the Native Linux KVM tool to Linux 3.1.
> > 
> > [ The changes to 9p headers were already merged but show up in the pull
> > request. ]
> > 
> > The goal of this tool is to provide a clean, from-scratch, lightweight
> > KVM host
> > tool implementation that can boot Linux guest images with no BIOS
> > dependencies
> > and with only the minimal amount of legacy device emulation. The primary
> > focus
> > of the tool is to Linux but there are already people on working on
> > supporting
> > GRUB and other operating systems.
> > 
> > We want the tool to be part of Linux kernel source tree because we
> > believe that
> > ‘perf’ clearly showed the benefits of a single repository for both
> > kernel and
> > userspace components. See Ingo Molnar’s email that started the project for
> > details:
> > 
> >   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/962051/focus=962620
> 
> I've read several times now that developing in a single tree leads to
> better results. Can you provide some example from the QEMU/KVM projects
> where the split is preventing innovation, optimizations, or some other
> kind of progress?
> 

Anthony had a talk on last years KVM forum regarding the QEMU threading
model (slide:
http://www.linux-kvm.org/wiki/images/7/70/2010-forum-threading-qemu.pdf) .

It was suggested that the KVM part of QEMU is having a hard time
achieving the ideal threading model due to its need to support TCG -
something which has nothing to do with KVM itself.


-- 

Sasha.

--
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/