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.
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.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
