>>> On 8/19/2009 at  3:13 AM, in message <[email protected]>, Avi 
>>> Kivity
<[email protected]> wrote: 
> On 08/19/2009 09:40 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>
>>    
>>>> So if I whip up a virtio-net backend for vbus with a PCI compliant
>>>> connector, you are happy?
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> This doesn't improve virtio-net in any way.
>>>      
>> Any why not?  (Did you notice I said "PCI compliant", i.e. over virtio-pci)
>>    
> 
> Because virtio-net will have gained nothing that it didn't have before.

??

*) ABI is virtio-pci compatible, as you like
*) fast-path is in-kernel, as we all like
*) model is in vbus so it would work in all environments that vbus supports.

> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> virtio already supports this model; see lguest and s390.  Transporting
>>> virtio over vbus and vbus over something else doesn't gain anything over
>>> directly transporting virtio over that something else.
>>>      
>> This is not what I am advocating.
>>
>>    
> 
> What are you advocating?  As far as I can tell your virtio-vbus 
> connector plus the vbus-kvm connector is just that.

I wouldn't classify it anything like that, no.  Its just virtio over vbus.

-Greg





--
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

Reply via email to