> -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:b...@decadent.org.uk] > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:10 PM > To: KY Srinivasan > Cc: Mike Sterling; Andy Whitcroft; debian-kernel@lists.debian.org; Ubuntu > kernel > team; Tom Hanrahan > Subject: Re: Debian and Hyper-V VM drivers > > On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 15:32 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > Ben, > > > > Sorry to be top posting; since I got into this thread late and I was > > only commenting on one item, I felt top posting was appropriate. > > Thanks for the patches and the analysis. With regards to question 4, > > why do you say the protocol is not stable. The protocol is stable and > > is backward compatible. However, our implementation on the guest side > > has been incremental and with incomplete knowledge of the protocol. > > I mean the kernel-to-daemon connector protocol, not the host-to-guest > protocol.
Ok; this protocol has also suffered from our incomplete understanding of the host/guest protocol. I think this last round of cleanup that I have done should hopefully not need any further tweaking here. IP injection required that I generalize the kernel-to daemon protocol. Moving forward, I think it will make sense to evolve the protocol in a compatible fashion. > > Do you expect to change the connector protocol in future, and if so > would the new daemon then be incompatible with old kernel versions? If > so, then the daemon needs to be packaged in such a way that there can be > multiple versions installed and we automatically start whichever matches > the current kernel version. But if it will remain backward-compatible > then we don't need to bother with that. Backward compatibility is my goal (once the IP injection patches go in). Regards, K. Y
