linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to test kernels

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:	Sun, 06 Nov 2011 14:43:05 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
CC:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org list" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to test kernels

On 11/06/2011 02:32 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> wrote:
> > But from your description, you're trying to solve just another narrow
> > problem:
> >
> > "The end game for me is to replace QEMU/VirtualBox for Linux on Linux
> > virtualization for my day to day purposes. "
> >
> > We rarely merge a subsystem to solve one person's problem (esp. when it
> > is defined as "replace another freely available project", even if you
> > dislike its command line syntax).
>
> I really don't understand your point. Other people are using the KVM
> tool for other purposes. For example, the (crazy) simulation guys are
> using the tool to launch even more guests on a single host and Ingo
> seems to be using the tool to test kernels.
>
> I'm not suggesting we should merge the tool because of my particular
> use case. I'm simply saying the problem I personally want to solve
> with the KVM tool is broader than what Alexander's script is doing.
> That's why I feel it's a pointless project.

We're going in circles, but I'll try again.

You say that kvm-tool's scope is broader than Alex's script, therefore
the latter is pointless.
You accept that qemu's scope is broader than kvm-tool (and is a
superset).  That is why many people think kvm-tool is pointless.

Alex's script, though, is just a few dozen lines.  kvm-tool is a 20K
patch - in fact 2X as large as kvm when it was first merged.  And it's
main feature seems to be that "it is not qemu".

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/