[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1979127675.2501555.1360039341169.JavaMail.root@vmware.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 20:42:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Andy King <acking@...are.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: pv-drivers@...are.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
dtor@...are.com
Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 0/6] VSOCK for Linux upstreaming
Hi Dave,
> >> Instead, what I remember doing was deferring to the feedback these
> >> folks received, stating that ideas that the virtio people had
> >> mentioned should be considered instead.
> >>
> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135301515818462&w=2
> >
> > I believe Andy replied to Anthony's AF_VMCHANNEL post and the
> > differences between the proposed solutions.
>
> I'd much rather see a hypervisor neutral solution than a hypervisor
> specific one which this certainly is.
We've addressed this with the latest patch series, which I sent earlier
today. vSockets now has support for pluggable transports, of which VMCI
happens to be the first; all transport code is separated out into its
own module. So the core is now hypervisor neutral. Given that, would
you be willing to re-consider it, please? If at all possible, we'd like
to make the current merge window.
Thanks so much!
- Andy
--
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