[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/3] generic hypercall support
Gregory Haskins wrote:

>>> Ack. I hope when its all said and done I can convince you that the
>>> framework to code up those virtio backends in the kernel is vbus ;)
>> If vbus doesn't bring significant performance advantages, I'll prefer
>> virtio because of existing investment.
> Just to clarify: vbus is just the container/framework for the in-kernel
> models. You can implement and deploy virtio devices inside the
> container (tho I haven't had a chance to sit down and implement one
> yet). Note that I did publish a virtio transport in the last few series
> to demonstrate how that might work, so its just ripe for the picking if
> someone is so inclined.

Yeah I keep getting confused over this.

> So really the question is whether you implement the in-kernel virtio
> backend in vbus, in some other framework, or just do it standalone.

I prefer the standalone model. Keep the glue in userspace.

Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-08 10:39    [W:0.175 / U:5.168 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site