> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [mailto:jeremy@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 2:20 PM > To: Santos, Jose Renato G > Cc: Rusty Russell; Jimi Xenidis; Stephen Rothwell; Xen > Mailing List; jmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Herbert Xu; kvm-devel; > virtualization; Christian Borntraeger; Suzanne McIntosh; > Anthony Liguori; Martin Schwidefsky > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/3] virtio infrastructure > > Santos, Jose Renato G wrote: > > It seems that we will still need specific devices drivers > > for each different virtualization flavor. For example, > > we will still need to have a specific Xen netfront > > device that talks to a backend device in dom0, using > > page grants, and other Xen specific mechanisms. > > It looks like will still need to maintain all the virtual device > > drivers and in addition we will now have to maintain > > another virtualization layer. > > > > The hope is that the Xen-specific elements of the driver will > be restricted to Xen-specific things like grant tables, and > the bulk of the driver and its logic can be common. Whether > that can be achieved and still retain the full > performance/features of the entirely Xen-specific netfront > driver remains to be seen. I haven't had a chance to look at > doing any Xen-virtio glue yet, so I'm not really sure how it > will work out. > > J > Ok, if you share some common code this could be beneficial, but in the specific case of Xen networking I believe most of netfront code is Xen specific. I think that a generic "virtual-IO" layer would not be beneficial in this case, but instead it would only add extra complexity to glue the layers. I don't know if this will be the case for other virtualization technologies, but I think it would be useful to have a better understanding of exactly which code could be shared before proposing something like this to the linux mantainers. I think it will probably not be accepted upstream if there is no clear evidence of code sharing. And if the sharing is not uniform across all virtualization technologies, we should keep an option of bypassing the virtio layer when it does not help or when it makes code more complex (which I suspect will be the case for Xen networking). Just my 2 cents, Regards Renato _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
