On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Pekka Enberg <penb...@kernel.org> wrote: >> So integrating kvm-tool into the kernel isn't going to work as a free >> pass to make non-backwards compatible changes to the KVM user/kernel >> interface. Given that, why bloat the kernel source tree size? > > Ted, I'm confused. Making backwards incompatible ABI changes has never > been on the table. Why are you bringing it up?
And btw, KVM tool is not a random userspace project - it was designed to live in tools/kvm from the beginning. I've explained the technical rationale for sharing kernel code here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/4/150 Please also see Ingo's original rant that started the project: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/962051/focus=962620 Pekka -- 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
