Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:33:33 +0200 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33 |
| |
On 12/24/2009 11:36 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote: >> As a twist on this, the VMware paravirt driver interface is so >> hardware-like that they're getting hardware vendors to supply cards that >> implement it. Try that with a pure software approach. >> > Any hardware engineer (myself included) will tell you that, generally > speaking, what you can do in hardware you can do in software (think of > what QEMU does today, for instance). It's purely a cost/performance > tradeoff. > > I can at least tell you that is true of vbus. Anything on the vbus side > would be equally eligible for a hardware implementation, though there is > not reason to do this today since we have equivalent functionality in > baremetal already.
There's a huge difference in the probability of vmware getting cards to their spec, or x86 vendors improving interrupt delivery to guests, compared to vbus being implemented in hardware.
> The only motiviation is if you wanted to preserve > ABI etc, which is what vmware is presumably after. However, I am not > advocating this as necessary at this juncture. >
Maybe AlacrityVM users don't care about compatibility, but my users do.
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
| |