From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] QEMU PIC indirection patch for in-kernel APIC work Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 12:26:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20070405102656.GA5595@elte.hu> References: <4613C993.9020405@codemonkey.ws> <4613CC01.1090500@qumranet.com> <4613CDB2.4000903@codemonkey.ws> <4613D001.3040606@qumranet.com> <20070404200112.GA6070@elte.hu> <4614098F.2030307@us.ibm.com> <20070404212103.GA19026@elte.hu> <1175728768.12230.593.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070405093033.GC25448@elte.hu> <4614C846.7070605@qumranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Rusty Russell , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:56482 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966017AbXDEK1M (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 06:27:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4614C846.7070605@qumranet.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * Avi Kivity wrote: > > so right now the only option for a clean codebase is the KVM > > in-kernel code. > > I strongly disagree with this. are you disagreeing with my statement that the KVM kernel-side code is the only clean codebase here? To me this is a clear fact :) I only pointed out that the only clean codebase at the moment is the KVM in-kernel code - i did not make the argument (at all) that every new piece of KVM code should be done in the kernel. That would be stupid - do you think i'd advocate for example moving command line argument parsing into the kernel? and as i said in the mail: "the kernel _is_ the best place to do this particular stuff". Ingo