On 18.03.2010, at 09:56, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 03/17/2010 10:10 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>>> It's about who owns the user interface. >>>> >>>> If qemu owns the user interface, than we can satisfy this in a very >>>> simple way by adding a perf monitor command. If we have to support third >>>> party tools, then it significantly complicates things. >>> >>> Of course illogical modularization complicates things 'significantly'. >> >> Who should own the user interface then? > > If qemu was in tools/kvm/ then we wouldnt have such issues. A single patch (or > series of patches) could modify tools/kvm/, arch/x86/kvm/, virt/ and > tools/perf/. It's not a 1:1 connection. There are more users of the KVM interface. To name a few I'm aware of: - Mac-on-Linux (PPC) - Dolphin (PPC) - Xenner (x86) - Kuli (s390) Having a clear userspace interface is the only viable solution there. And if you're interested, look at my MOL enabling patch. It's less than 500 lines of code. The kernel/userspace interface really isn't the difficult part. Getting device emulation working properly, easily and fast is. Alex-- 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
