On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:51 PM, Anthony Liguori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >> >> Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> >>> This patch only implements the bare minimum support to get a guest >>> booting. It >>> has very little impact the rest of QEMU and attempts to integrate nicely >>> with >>> the rest of QEMU. >>> >> >> Huh? That isn't based on the qemu-accel patches ... >> > > This is part of the reason for this exercise. I'd rather introduce KVM > support first and then look at abstracting things, than vice versa. A > number of the hooks in the current QEMUAccel tree are there for the wrong > reason (to support the out-of-tree IO thread, for instance). > > If you just introduce something with various hooks and say, these are hooks > we'll need, it's not possible to really evaluate whether the hooks are > needed because nothing in the tree makes use of them.
We talked extensively on monday about it, and I'm in agreement with it. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >> surprised, >> Gerd >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in >> the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > > > -- Glauber Costa. "Free as in Freedom" http://glommer.net "The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
