On 08/25/2011 02:15 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi<stefanha@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Introducing yet another non-standard and non-Linux interface doesn't > help though. If there is no significant improvement over ivshmem then > it makes sense to let ivshmem gain critical mass and more users > instead of fragmenting the space. Look, I'm not going to require QEMU compatibility from tools/kvm contributors. If you guys really feel that strongly about the interface, then either - Get Rusty's "virtio spec pixie pee" for ivshmem
It's not a virtio device (doesn't do dma). It does have a spec in qemu.git/docs/specs.
- Get the Linux driver merged to linux-next
ivshmem uses uio, so it doesn't need an in-kernel driver, IIRC. Map your BAR from sysfs and go.
- Help out David and Sasha to change interface But don't ask me to block clean code from inclusion to tools/kvm because it doesn't have a QEMU-capable interface.
A lot of thought has gone into the design and implementation of ivshmem. But don't let that stop you from merging clean code.
-- 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
