[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111106183132.GA4500@thunk.org>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 13:31:32 -0500
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org list" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@...il.com>,
Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to
test kernels
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 11:08:10AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I'm quite happy with KVM tool and hope they continue working on it.
> My only real wish is that they wouldn't copy QEMU so much and would
> try bolder things that are fundamentally different from QEMU.
My big wish is that they don't try to merge the KVM tool into the
kernel code. It's a separate userspace project, and there's no reason
for it to be bundled with kernel code. It just makes the kernel
sources larger. The mere fact that qemu-kvm exists means that the KVM
interface has to remain backward compatible; it *is* an ABI.
So integrating kvm-tool into the kernel isn't going to work as a free
pass to make non-backwards compatible changes to the KVM user/kernel
interface. Given that, why bloat the kernel source tree size?
Please, keep the kvm-tool sources as a separate git tree.
- Ted
--
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