On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 10:47 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > regarding ABI: agreed that it's experimental right now and should stay > so for some time, but i dont see a reason why the hypercall API that > i've posted in the past few days couldnt be evolved in the way Linux > syscalls evolve, by only adding to them. That doesnt really impact the > flexibility of the virtualization subsystem. We could also possibly > phase out older hypercalls, because the number of "applications" relying > on it will be very low.
I suggest you continue adding hypercalls, and see where you end up. It will be very interesting, particularly when you get to the paravirt_ops lazy_mode hooks. However, I believe it is worthwhile to have a mini hypervisor which totals less than 5000 lines, including userspace utilities. I don't believe it will change the world, but maybe some of the ideas will be incorporated in "big serious" hypervisors. But meanwhile, it's fun! Cheers! Rusty. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
