On 2011-02-08 11:27, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Stefan Hajnoczi a écrit : >> Introducing IOTHREAD made !CONFIG_IOTHREAD platforms second class >> citizens. I think you'd like people to provide full support when they >> introduce new features. >> > > I think you really pointed the problem here. We should probably add a > feature that will make KVM second class citizen so that people can > understand what it means.
There are people out there who already thought loudly about forking or rewriting those QEMU bits required for KVM support just to make "life easier". I already disagreed on this, and I continue to do so as both use cases nicely benefit from each other. KVM is driving QEMU features today that would otherwise have taken years to show up, if at all. On the other side, all those bits related to the cross-arch platform emulation of non-x86 helps and will continue to help KVM support on those archs as well (we already have it on PPC, we'll see on ARM and likely more in the future). So, please let's stop this useless finger pointing, on both sides. KVM and QEMU is a symbiosis. Unfortunately, this is not (yet?) the case for POSIX vs. Windows hosts. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
