Hi Ingo,

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> Unlike Qemu tools/kvm/ has a design that is very fit for MAC
> concepts: it uses separate helper threads for separate resources
> (this could in many cases even be changed to be separate processes
> which only share access to the guest RAM image) - while Qemu is in
> most parts a state machine, so in tools/kvm/ we can realistically
> have a good object manager and keep an exploit in a networking
> interface driver from being able to access disk driver state.

I haven't really followed this particular discussion nor do I know if
Qemu is good or bad fit but sure, for tools/kvm Chrome-style
sandboxing makes tons of sense and would be a pretty good fit for how
our device model works now.

                        Pekka