On 03/21/2010 11:00 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Avi Kivity<avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 03/21/2010 09:59 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Frankly, i was surprised (and taken slightly off base) by both Avi and Anthony
suggesting such a clearly inferior "add a demon to the guest space" solution.
It's a usability and deployment non-starter.
It's only clearly inferior if you ignore every consideration against it.
It's definitely not a deployment non-starter, see the tons of daemons that
come with any Linux system. [...]
Avi, please dont put arguments into my mouth that i never made.
Sorry, that was not the intent. I meant that putting things into the
kernel have disadvantages that must be considered.
My (clearly expressed) argument was that:
_a new guest-side demon is a transparent instrumentation non-starter_
What is so hard to understand about that simple concept? Instrumentation is
good if it's as transparent as possible.
Of course lots of other features can be done via a new user-space package ...
I believe you can deploy this daemon via a (default) package, without
any hassle to users.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
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
