lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: Xen is a feature
From
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 12:07:32 +0530

> Hi Dave,
>
> On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 21:05 -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
>> Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 17:45:34 -0700
>>
>> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >> Xen changes - especially dom0 - are overwhelmingly not about improving
>> >> Linux, but about having some special hook and extra treatment in
>> >> random places - and that's really bad.
>> >>
>> >
>> > You've made this argument a few times now, and I take exception to it.
>> >
>> > It seems to be predicated on the idea that Xen has some kind of niche
>> > usage, with barely more users than Voyager. Or that it is a parasite
>> > sitting on the side of Linux, being a pure drain.
>>
>> I don't see Ingo's comments, whether I agree with them or not, as
>> an implication of Xen being niche. Rather I see his comments as
>> an opposition to how Xen is implemented.
>>
>
> You can see Ingo's comments and whole thread under subject :
>
> Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [GIT PULL] Xen APIC hooks (with io_apic_ops)
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/27/758

Jeremy is specifically commenting on Ingo's quoted "argument".
And that "argument" is what he takes "exception to".

And that's the scope of what I'm commenting on too.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-29 08:53    [W:0.274 / U:2.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site