lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus_driver objects
>>> On 8/19/2009 at  1:48 AM, in message <4A8B9241.20300@redhat.com>, Avi Kivity
<avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 08/19/2009 08:36 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>> If virtio net in guest could be improved instead, everyone would
>>> benefit.
>>>
>> 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)


>
>>> I am doing this, and I wish more people would join. Instead,
>>> you change ABI in a incompatible way.
>>>
>> Only by choice of my particular connector. The ABI is a function of the
>> connector design. So one such model is to terminate the connector in
>> qemu, and surface the resulting objects as PCI devices. I choose not to
>> use this particular design for my connector that I am pushing upstream
>> because I am of the opinion that I can do better by terminating it in
>> the guest directly as a PV optimized bus. However, both connectors can
>> theoretically coexist peacefully.
>>
>
> 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.

Kind Regards,
-Greg







\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-19 08:45    [W:0.274 / U:2.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site