On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:25:38 +0100
Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Le 15/03/2017 à 11:29, Greg Kurz a écrit :
> > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:56:36 +0100
> > Peter Maydell wrote:
> >
> >> On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >>> Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, S
Le 15/03/2017 à 11:29, Greg Kurz a écrit :
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:56:36 +0100
> Peter Maydell wrote:
>
>> On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> Peter Maydell wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:56:36 +0100
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela wrote:
> > Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> The minimum requirements for
On 03/14/2017 11:56 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
The minimum requirements for the new language:
>>>
On Di, 2017-03-14 at 17:29 +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Peter Maydell (peter.mayd...@linaro.org) wrote:
> > On 14 March 2017 at 17:01, Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> > wrote:
> > > I also do a FreeBSD VM
> >
> > Do you have repro instructions for how to conveniently set
> > this up?
>
> N
* Peter Maydell (peter.mayd...@linaro.org) wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 17:01, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > I also do a FreeBSD VM
>
> Do you have repro instructions for how to conveniently set
> this up?
No, but given that it's the first time I've set up a BSD in ~20 years
it can't have be
On 14 March 2017 at 17:01, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> I also do a FreeBSD VM
Do you have repro instructions for how to conveniently set
this up?
thanks
-- PMM
On 14/03/2017 17:20, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> I also do a FreeBSD VM, and grab an aarch64 and/or PPC bigendian host
>> to test on.
>>
>> (I could grab an ia64 host, but I don't think I could find anything
>> to install on it that would be new enough for the rest of our build
>> requirements).
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 04:01:14PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Juan Quintela (quint...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > >> The minimum requirem
* Juan Quintela (quint...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> The minimum requirements for the new language:
> >> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that
Am 14.03.2017 um 13:20 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> Kevin Wolf writes:
>
> > Am 14.03.2017 um 10:24 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
> >> > - in all areas our legacy code and back-compatibility requirements
> >> > are threatening to choke forward progress if we don't make serious
> >> >
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 14.03.2017 um 10:24 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
>> > - in all areas our legacy code and back-compatibility requirements
>> > are threatening to choke forward progress if we don't make serious
>> > efforts to get on top of them
>>
>> ... and don't forget all the
On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> The minimum requirements for the new language:
>>> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that
On 14/03/2017 11:39, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> 3. Is it safer than C even when writing code to operate on guest RAM
>>(i.e. it's no good if you must use unsafe primitives to do the
>>systems programming tasks that QEMU requires)?
> My impression is that many of our security vulnerabilities
On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> The minimum requirements for the new language:
> 3. Is it safer than C even when writing code to operate on guest RAM
>(i.e. it's no good if you must use unsafe primitives to do the
>systems programming tasks that QEMU requires)?
My imp
On 14 March 2017 at 10:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 13.03.2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Are we trying to be:
>> . a dev platform before easy h/w availability?
>> [not easy for QEMU for several reasons]
>
> What reasons exactly do you mean here?
The main ones I had in mind are:
* t
Am 14.03.2017 um 10:24 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
> > - in all areas our legacy code and back-compatibility requirements
> > are threatening to choke forward progress if we don't make serious
> > efforts to get on top of them
>
> ... and don't forget all the code that is in "orphan" st
Peter Maydell writes:
> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The minimum requirements for the new language:
>> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that QEMU runs on?
>> 2. Does it support the host archite
On 13.03.2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
>>
>> So far the agenda is:
>>
>> - Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
>>
>> https://cloudplatform.g
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The minimum requirements for the new language:
>> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that QEMU runs on?
>> 2. Does it support the host architect
Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> - on the "VM support" side, QEMU is more used because it's the only
>> production-quality option in this space, rather than because its
>> users love it. (cf the Google choice to replace it.) It's also got
>> a pretty poor security record. It wouldn't be to
On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The minimum requirements for the new language:
> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that QEMU runs on?
> 2. Does it support the host architectures that QEMU runs on?
Spe
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
> >
> > So far the agenda is:
> >
> > - Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 03:12:07PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
> >>
> >> So far the agenda is:
> >>
> >> - Direction of QEMU and tools
On 13 March 2017 at 15:12, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Peter Maydell wrote:
>> [Making QEMU more modular would help with defeating the legacy
>> and back-compat dragons, though]
>
> That would be ideal, but where to start? Think of something as "simple"
> asd adding a struct of operations tha
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
>>
>> So far the agenda is:
>>
>> - Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
>>
>> https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/201
Peter Maydell writes:
> On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
>>
>> So far the agenda is:
>>
>> - Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
>>
>> https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/
On 12 March 2017 at 21:45, Juan Quintela wrote:
>
>
> Hi
>
> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
>
> So far the agenda is:
>
> - Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
>
> https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2017/01/7-ways-we-harden-our-KVM-hyper
Hi
Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
So far the agenda is:
- Direction of QEMU and toolstack in light of Google Cloud blog:
https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2017/01/7-ways-we-harden-our-KVM-hypervisor-at-Google-Cloud-security-in-plaintext.html
After discuss
29 matches
Mail list logo
