Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:49:38 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus_driver objects |
| |
On 08/19/2009 02:40 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote: > >>>>> So if I whip up a virtio-net backend for vbus with a PCI compliant >>>>> connector, you are happy? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> This doesn't improve virtio-net in any way. >>>> >>>> >>> Any why not? (Did you notice I said "PCI compliant", i.e. over virtio-pci) >>> >>> >> Because virtio-net will have gained nothing that it didn't have before. >> > ?? > > *) ABI is virtio-pci compatible, as you like >
That's not a gain, that's staying in the same place.
> *) fast-path is in-kernel, as we all like >
That's not a gain as we have vhost-net (sure, in development, but your proposed backend isn't even there yet).
> *) model is in vbus so it would work in all environments that vbus supports. >
The ABI can be virtio-pci compatible or it can be vbus-comaptible. How can it be both? The ABIs are different.
Note that if you had submitted a virtio-net backend I'd have asked you to strip away all the management / bus layers and we'd have ended up with vhost-net.
>>>> virtio already supports this model; see lguest and s390. Transporting >>>> virtio over vbus and vbus over something else doesn't gain anything over >>>> directly transporting virtio over that something else. >>>> >>>> >>> This is not what I am advocating. >>> >>> >>> >> What are you advocating? As far as I can tell your virtio-vbus >> connector plus the vbus-kvm connector is just that. >> > I wouldn't classify it anything like that, no. Its just virtio over vbus. >
We're in a loop. Doesn't virtio over vbus need a virtio-vbus connector? and doesn't vbus need a connector to talk to the hypervisor?
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
| |