From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754204Ab0CVHN0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:13:26 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2773 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753483Ab0CVHNZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:13:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4BA7187E.3050405@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:13:02 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100301 Fedora/3.0.3-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Pekka Enberg , Anthony Liguori , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Peter Zijlstra , Sheng Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , oerg Roedel , Jes Sorensen , Gleb Natapov , Zachary Amsden , ziteng.huang@intel.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Fr?d?ric Weisbecker Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project References: <20100318170223.GB9756@elte.hu> <4BA25E66.2050800@redhat.com> <20100318172805.GB26067@elte.hu> <4BA32E1A.2060703@redhat.com> <20100319085346.GG12576@elte.hu> <4BA47AD0.2010509@redhat.com> <20100321190656.GC25922@elte.hu> <4BA68009.5010906@redhat.com> <20100321205531.GC30194@elte.hu> <4BA692C3.7010408@redhat.com> <20100321215455.GB13219@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20100321215455.GB13219@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/21/2010 11:54 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Avi Kivity wrote: > > >> On 03/21/2010 10:55 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >>> Of course you could say the following: >>> >>> ' Thanks, I'll mark this for v2.6.36 integration. Note that we are not >>> able to add this to the v2.6.35 kernel queue anymore as the ongoing >>> usability work already takes up all of the project's maintainer and >>> testing bandwidth. If you want the feature to be merged sooner than that >>> then please help us cut down on the TODO and BUGS list that can be found >>> at XYZ. There's quite a few low hanging fruits there. ' >>> >> That would be shooting at my own foot as well as the contributor's since I >> badly want that RCU stuff, and while a GUI would be nice, that itch isn't on >> my back. >> > I think this sums up the root cause of all the problems i see with KVM pretty > well. > I think we agree at last. Neither I nor my employer are interested in running qemu as a desktop-on-desktop tool, therefore I don't invest any effort in that direction, or require it from volunteers. If you think a good GUI is so badly needed, either write one yourself, or convince someone else to do it. (btw, why are you interested in desktop-on-desktop? one use case is developers, which don't really need fancy GUIs; a second is people who test out distributions, but that doesn't seem to be a huge population; and a third is people running Windows for some application that doesn't run on Linux - hopefully a small catergory as well. Seems to be quite a small target audience, compared to, say, video editing) -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.