Amit Shah wrote:
On (Mon) Aug 31 2009 [09:21:13], Anthony Liguori wrote:
Amit Shah wrote:
Can you please explain your rationale for being so rigid about merging
the two drivers?
Because they do the same thing. I'm not going to constantly rehash
this. It's been explained multiple times.
It hardly looks like the same thing each passing day.
That's BS. The very first time you posted, you received the same
feedback from both Paul and I. See
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/44778. That was back
in June. You've consistently received the same feedback both on the ML
and in private.
We're ending up having to compromise on the performance or functionality
or simplicity the devices just because of this restriction.
This is _not_ a high performance device and there so far has been no
functionality impact. I don't understand why you keep dragging your
feet about this. It's very simple, if you post a functional set of
patches for a converged virtio-console driver, we'll merge it. If you
keep arguing about having a separate virtio-serial driver, it's not
going to get merged. I don't know how to be more clear than this.
If there are implementation issues within the Linux drivers because of
peculiarities of hvc then hvc needs to be fixed. It has nothing to do
with the driver ABI which is what qemu cares about.
I'd welcome that effort as well. But we all know that's not going to
happen anytime soon.
That is not a justification to add a new device in QEMU. If we add a
new device everytime we encounter a less than ideal interface within a
guest, we're going to end up having hundreds of devices.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
--
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
