From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>,
penberg@kernel.org, john@jfloren.net, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
asias.hejun@gmail.com, gorcunov@gmail.com,
prasadjoshi124@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5 V2] kvm tools: Initialize and use VESA and VNC
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 12:01:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DDCD364.9090903@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110525093611.GD28500@elte.hu>
On 05/25/2011 11:36 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So can other portability problems be solved, such as linker scripts
> can be written for non-ELF targets (should that ever become
> necessary)
I know that's not going to be the case, and I mentioned that in my first
message---portability is not relevant to tools/kvm/ just like it is not
relevant say to systemd.
> so what's your point?
Using this kind of trick makes it harder to share code with other
libraries that may require a higher standard of portability (not
"better" or "worse", just "higher"). QEMU _does_ have this problem BTW,
we have our own event loop and AIO, our own JSON parser, our own thread
abstractions, and so on...
> We want to use ELF sections in the future *anyway* to make
> tools/kvm/ scale even better, for example to use alternative
> instruction fixups (for which no GCC extension exists) so a linker
> script will be there anyway.
Since you're not writing the hypervisor, but only the device model, I
doubt that this is needed (and you'd likely run into troubles with
SELinux). QEMU scales to dozens of VCPUs with a big lock around all
userspace device model code. But it's premature to say that, and I'd be
happy if I were proven wrong.
> Fact is that neither ((section)) *NOR* ((constructor)) is portable:
> *both* are GCC extensions - while you falsely claimed that
> ((constructor)) was somehow portable and that ((section)) was an
> 'unportable trick'.
Fair enough. I agree that ((constructor)) has limited scope and is
compiler-unportable. ((section)) is more powerful and has the cost of
using also target-unportable linker scripts, and requiring changes to
the build system. Both have the same problem with static libraries
(please reread my message).
>>>>>> I know portability is not relevant to tools/kvm/, but
>>>>>> using unportable tricks for the sake of using them is a
>>>>>> direct way to NIH. But oh well all of tools/kvm/ is NIH
>>>>>> after all. :)
>
> Btw., that NIH claim was rather unfair and uncalled for as well.
Hey hey I put a smiley for a reason!
Anyway I think we both agree that this debate is pointless. I learnt
something (I wasn't aware of interaction between ((constructor)) and
static libraries), you learnt something (it's the same with ((section)),
and it's intrinsic in how static libraries work).
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-25 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-23 11:19 [PATCH 1/5 V2] kvm tools: Add BIOS INT10 handler Sasha Levin
2011-05-23 11:19 ` [PATCH 2/5 V2] kvm tools: Add video mode to kernel initialization Sasha Levin
2011-05-23 11:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-23 11:19 ` [PATCH 3/5 V2] kvm tools: Add VESA device Sasha Levin
2011-05-23 11:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-23 11:19 ` [PATCH 4/5 V2] kvm tools: Update makefile and feature tests Sasha Levin
2011-05-23 11:19 ` [PATCH 5/5 V2] kvm tools: Initialize and use VESA and VNC Sasha Levin
2011-05-23 11:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-23 11:45 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 8:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-24 8:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 9:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-24 9:55 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 11:22 ` Avi Kivity
2011-05-24 11:26 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 11:30 ` Sasha Levin
2011-05-24 11:30 ` Avi Kivity
2011-05-24 11:38 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 11:41 ` Avi Kivity
2011-05-24 11:56 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 12:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-24 14:38 ` Avi Kivity
2011-05-24 14:37 ` Avi Kivity
2011-05-24 14:54 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-24 19:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 19:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 19:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 9:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-24 19:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 8:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-25 8:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 9:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-25 9:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 10:01 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2011-05-25 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 10:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-25 12:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 15:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-25 9:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 8:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 8:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-23 14:10 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-23 11:29 ` [PATCH 1/5 V2] kvm tools: Add BIOS INT10 handler Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DDCD364.9090903@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=asias.hejun@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=john@jfloren.net \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=levinsasha928@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=prasadjoshi124@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.