lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Virtualization steps
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 07:00:25PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:

>>And if it is intrusive to the core kernel, then as always we have to
>>try to evaluate the question "is it worth it"? How many people want it
>>and what alternatives do they have (eg. maintaining seperate patches,
>>using another approach), what are the costs, complexities, to other
>>users and developers etc.
>
>
> my words, but let me ask, what do you consider 'intrusive'?
>

I don't think I could give a complete answer...
I guess it could be stated as the increase in the complexity of
the rest of the code for someone who doesn't know anything about
the virtualization implementation.

Completely non intrusive is something like 2 extra function calls
to/from generic code, changes to data structures are transparent
(or have simple wrappers), and there is no shared locking or data
with the rest of the kernel. And it goes up from there.

Anyway I'm far from qualified... I just hope that with all the
work you guys are putting in that you'll be able to justify it ;)

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-28 22:24    [W:0.115 / U:4.456 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site