Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756208Ab1DHMdR (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2011 08:33:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pv0-f174.google.com ([74.125.83.174]:55130 "EHLO mail-pv0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752234Ab1DHMdQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2011 08:33:16 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=TI8glPXxKwOAmClKjyvh3Gy843CdFUocmSm94lZlqnSLDi2o69VyJbZBaWQ/IU+wl+ tcsZKkZ1mjV6L8bhgt6DDubJ+vAPwX80DWpSvDQEiyReHy90xledhIXSi/Zgw8WmgwuN f9S28/LqicdjLiiIfRLyr3N156AoyUEUocRi0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1301592656.586.15.camel@jaguar> <4D982E89.8070502@redhat.com> <4D9847BC.9060906@redhat.com> <4D98716D.9040307@codemonkey.ws> <4D9873CD.3080207@redhat.com> <20110406093333.GB6465@elte.hu> <4D9E6F6E.9050709@codemonkey.ws> <4D9EBBC3.2040803@siemens.com> <1302251236.27918.31.camel@jaguar> <4D9ED146.7040004@siemens.com> <4D9EE6A0.9020205@siemens.com> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 16:33:15 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Alexander Graf Cc: Jan Kiszka , Pekka Enberg , Anthony Liguori , Ingo Molnar , Avi Kivity , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "aarcange@redhat.com" , "mtosatti@redhat.com" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "joro@8bytes.org" , "asias.hejun@gmail.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1419 Lines: 32 On Friday, April 8, 2011, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 08.04.2011, at 12:42, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2011-04-08 11:32, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >>> It seems there is a misunderstanding. KVM-tool is quite far from been KVM >>> replacement (if ever). And what we're doing -- extremely tiny/small HV which >>> would help us to debug/test kernel code. >> >> I think your core team may have this vision, but my impression is that >> some people here think much further. > > I tend to agree. The core team seems to write this as a helping aid of learning the platform and getting to know KVM. I really like that approach :). > > However, if it's meant to be a "toy" (and I don't mean this negatively in any way), it really should be declared as such. Calling it "kvm" for example would be a huge mistake in that case. > > Either way, I like the idea of having a second user space available for x86. Even if it just means that it verifies that the documentation is correct :). > > > Alex > > If we manage to make kvm-tool mature i believe anyone will win in such case. The annonce stated clear the kvm-tool relation to qemu. Of course we have great planes tho :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/