Gregory Haskins wrote:
Ack. I hope when its all said and done I can convince you that the
framework to code up those virtio backends in the kernel is vbus ;)
If vbus doesn't bring significant performance advantages, I'll prefer
virtio because of existing investment.
Just to clarify: vbus is just the container/framework for the in-kernel
models. You can implement and deploy virtio devices inside the
container (tho I haven't had a chance to sit down and implement one
yet). Note that I did publish a virtio transport in the last few series
to demonstrate how that might work, so its just ripe for the picking if
someone is so inclined.
Yeah I keep getting confused over this.
So really the question is whether you implement the in-kernel virtio
backend in vbus, in some other framework, or just do it standalone.
I prefer the standalone model. Keep the glue in userspace.
--
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 majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
