On 12/24/2009 11:36 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
As a twist on this, the VMware paravirt driver interface is so
hardware-like that they're getting hardware vendors to supply cards that
implement it. Try that with a pure software approach.
Any hardware engineer (myself included) will tell you that, generally
speaking, what you can do in hardware you can do in software (think of
what QEMU does today, for instance). It's purely a cost/performance
tradeoff.
I can at least tell you that is true of vbus. Anything on the vbus side
would be equally eligible for a hardware implementation, though there is
not reason to do this today since we have equivalent functionality in
baremetal already.
There's a huge difference in the probability of vmware getting cards to
their spec, or x86 vendors improving interrupt delivery to guests,
compared to vbus being implemented in hardware.
The only motiviation is if you wanted to preserve
ABI etc, which is what vmware is presumably after. However, I am not
advocating this as necessary at this juncture.
Maybe AlacrityVM users don't care about compatibility, but my users do.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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
