[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] PATCH: Enable QEMU booting of blktap disks
- To: "Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: "Andrew Warfield" <andrew.warfield@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 06:04:19 -0700
- Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 06:02:33 -0700
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=eVwX19ARmGspbsi6xk+xcxeanG9c/8afUYFwyyZLM/KOhkflSCQNPCu9eMjk+SwChVd++Ox11gnVUS5ltmil2XiuqySB8Q2r5zW5au0MqvnQrkLMbF5sRgU7esy4CxNW9U4z6uY1E5QmFOlFsLAK21Abg/ylVizhzgo8YzmJrQM=
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
Gerd, don't misunderstand what I'm saying: I'd be delighted to see
blktap and qemu share block device implementations. However, the
blktap patch that I am commenting on achieves exactly the opposite of
that: it *requires* two implementations of any virtual disk type that
you want to use PV drivers on in an HVM guest.
a.
On 7/20/07, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Andrew Warfield wrote:
> As I've said before, I dislike the idea of having separate
> implementations of disks -- one in qemu and one in tapdisk.
The qemu one isn't going to go away due to qemu being *the* device model
for any kind of virtualization in Linux. So if you want to have tapdisk
share the code to avoid duplication I see two possible ways to get there:
(a) replace blktapd with qemu
(b) put the bits into a shared library, which then can be used by
qemu & blktapd and other tools (qemu-img, virtual machine
management tools, ...).
cheers,
Gerd
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
