Re: [PATCH 1/38] KVM: Create kvm-intel.ko module

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It's a fat, complex, presumably arch-specific, presumably 
> frequently-changing API.  So whatever we do will be unpleasant - 
> that's unavoidable in this case, I suspect.
> 
> (hmm, the interface isn't versioned at present - should it be?)
> 
> Maybe, perhaps, one day it _should_ be a syscall API.  But right now 
> if we did that it would become a versioned syscall API with obsolete 
> slots and various other warts.

yeah, very much agreed. For example the paravirtualization/accelerator 
downcalls/upcalls in KVM dont exist yet, so there's little to 
standardize. Once we see it from lhype & KVM how these things look like 
we can design a sane kernel interface around it. But i'm against the 
notion that KVM is 'just' a device. It's not, and it /will/ grow into 
something fundamental.

> I get the feeling we'd be best off if we were to revisit this in a 
> year or so.

yeah. I'd suggest merging it as-is into v2.6.20. In a year we'll have 
some real APIs to think about.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/