On 20/12/19 10:47, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >> If it doesn't create too large of a burden to support both, then I think >> it is very desirable. IIUC, this is saying a kernel based solution as the >> optimized/optimal solution, and userspace UNIX socket based option as the >> generic "works everywhere" fallback solution. > I'm slightly in favor of the kernel implementation because it keeps us > better aligned with VFIO. That means solving problems in one place only > and less reinventing the wheel.
I think there are anyway going to be some differences with VFIO. For example, currently VFIO requires pinning user memory. Is that a limitation for muser too? If so, that would be a big disadvantage; if not, however, management tools need to learn that muser devices unlike other VFIO devices do not prevent overcommit. Paolo
