Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

From: Avi Kivity <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:05:31 +0200

On 12/22/2009 06:21 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> So far, the only actual technical advantage I've seen is that vbus avoids
>> EOI exits.
>>      
> The technical advantage is that it's significantly faster today.
>
> Maybe your proposed alternative is as fast, or maybe it's not. Who knows?
>    

We're working on numbers for the proposed alternative, so we should know 
soon.  Are the AlacrityVM folks working on having all the virtio drivers 
for all the virtio archs?

We shouldn't drop everything and switch to new code just because someone 
came up with a new idea.  The default should be to enhance the existing 
code.

>> We think we understand why vbus does better than the current userspace
>> virtio backend.  That's why we're building vhost-net.  It's not done yet,
>> but our expectation is that it will do just as well if not better.
>>      
> That's the vapourware vs working code disconnect I mentioned. One side has hard
> numbers&working code and the other has expectations. I usually find it sad when the
> vapourware holds up the working code.
>    

vhost-net is working code and is queued for 2.6.33.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function