Ian Kirk wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> For mass storage, we should follow the SCSI model with a single device
>> serving multiple disks, similar to what you suggest.  Not sure if the
>> device should have a single queue or one queue per disk.
> Don't you just end up re-implementing SCSI then, at which point you might
> as well stick with a 'fake' SCSI device in the guest?

A virtio-scsi controller is indeed useful as it can control tapes, media 
changers, and other fancy stuff in addition to ordinary disks.  For 
disks, I'd like to avoid the overhead of scsi command generation and 

Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
kvm-devel mailing list

Reply via email to