On Tue, 4 May 2010 17:18:57 -0700 Pankaj Thakkar <pthak...@vmware.com> wrote:
> The purpose of this email is to introduce the architecture and the design > principles. The overall project involves more than just changes to vmxnet3 > driver and hence we though an overview email would be better. Once people > agree to the design in general we intend to provide the code changes to the > vmxnet3 driver. As Dave said, we care more about what the implementation looks like than the high level goals of the design. I think we all agree that better management of virtualized devices is necessary, the problem is that their are so many of them (vmware, xen, HV, Xen), and vendors seem to to lean on their own specific implementation of a offloading, which makes a general solution more difficult. Please, Please solve this cleanly. The little things like API's and locking semantics and handling of dynamic versus static control can make a good design in principle fall apart when someone does a bad job of implementing them. Lastly, projects that have had multiple people involved for long periods of time in the dark often end up building a legacy mentality "but we convinced vendor XXX to include it in their Enterprise version 666" and require lots of "retraining" before the code becomes acceptable. -- _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
