On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 03:38:05PM +0200, Denis Leroy wrote: > Jeremy Katz wrote: > >... and rather than helping to propagate the notion to vendors that out > >of tree drivers are "okay", why not try to help work with the > >maintainers to get the drivers upstream? > > My understanding is that they are. One of problem with the "get the > drivers upstream" concept is that it's a slow and difficult endeavour. > There used to be some anti-VMWare resentment on LKML that wouldn't help > either, but I don't know whether that's still true or not... Some of the it has been sent upstream and there were some issues that needed more work - eg getting a reliable and safe way to detect that it is running on vmware [quote http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/8/130] vmware could have used one of the following methods to communicate to the guest kernel: - a CPUID and an MSR range - like a good virtual CPU should. That way even bootloaders could detect the presence of vmware. - or a PCI ID and a PCI driver like KVM does - or a system call hypercall gateway like Xen and KVM does - or it could even have used a DMI signature of some sort but no, vmware had to use 30 year old unsafe ISA port magic... To add insult to injury that port is named 'backdoor' - very smart and confidence raising naming. Plus it does not even use some well-known PC port that is harmless to read - it has to be from the middle of the generic IO port resource range where a real PCI card could sit: 0x5658. [/quote] Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
