Re: kvmtool tree (Was: Re: [patch] config: fix make kvmconfig)

From: Anca Emanuel <anca.emanuel@gmail.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: kvmtool tree (Was: Re: [patch] config: fix make kvmconfig)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:58:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJL_dMty3ejGuf8fh0q8jAXsr8OtWq_HQdJHQ88u4Z2BpJzOvg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360588699.7383.52.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>

[quote]the ultimate goal being to make this new socket family
hypervisor-neutral[/quote]
That was from vmware.
If somebody will make something generic, to please xen, kvm, vmware,
and others in an 15 to 20 years time...
Then a tool like this will be accepted ?

Linus, you know this tool was only for x86.
Now if you look at this:
https://github.com/penberg/linux-kvm/commit/051bdb63879385e12b7e253b72cdde909a5e0b9b
There are other platforms added.
Look here: https://wiki.linaro.org/LEG/Engineering/Virtualization
[quote]kvmtool is used meanwhile[/quote]
They are using it !

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 13:56 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> To use another, perhaps more applicable analogy:
>>
>> If one has the choice to start a new business in the U.S., it
>> would be reasonable to do that. There's a lot of supporting
>> infrastructure, trust, distribution, standards, enforcement
>> agencies and available workers.
>>
>> Could the same business succeed in Somalia as well? Possibly -
>> if it's a bakery or something similarly fundamental. More
>> complex businesses would likely not thrive very well there.
>>
>> *That* is how I think the current Linux kernel tooling landscape
>> looks like currently in a fair number of places: in many aspects
>> it's similar to Somalia - disjunct entities with not much
>> commonality or shared infrastructure.
>
> That's complete nonsense. If you want to use pieces of the kernel
> infrastructure, then just *take* them. There are loads of projects which
> use the kernel config tools, for example. There's no need to be *in* the
> kernel repo.
>
> And for code-reuse it's even easy enough to automatically extract parts
> of kernel code into a separate repository. See the ecos-jffs2 and
> linux-headers trees, for example, which automatically tracked Linus'
> tree with a certain transformation to make them sane for just pulling
> into the relevant target repositories.
>
> --
> dwmw2
>