On Thu 11/29/07 at 18:11 PM, Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM wrote: > Nils Nieuwejaar wrote: > >When this proposal was originally sent out, there was a bit of concern > >expressed on this list about our intention to modify cmdk and possibly some > >future drivers. Offline, I received some rather stronger objections to > >this idea, so I have updated the proposal to address those concerns. > > > >Rather than modifying the existing cmdk, we are now proposing to create a > >brand new cmdk that will only be used to access paravirtualized disk > >drivers. This approach will leave the existing driver completely > >untouched. > > Please tell me you don't intend to take a copy of the cmdk source to do > this ? > Is this going to be a very simple driver that happens to have then name > cmdk to take advantage of the fact that the driver name is baked in places ?
Exactly. This is a thin shell driver that does nothing but make LDI calls to the paravirtual 'xdf' driver. It will be incapable of managing physical disks, which is why we need to sequester it in the new i86hvm directory. Nils
