Re: hardwired VMI crap

[Pavel Machek]

On Thu 2007-03-08 14:39:15, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >* Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >>Ingo, either you or Thomas have vetoed every attempt we have made to 
> >>make our code operate with clockevents. [...]
> >>    
> >
> >this is news to me - do you have any proof of such a veto?
> >  
> 
> Yes, your refusal to discuss any technical details when asked point 
> blank which solution you prefer, and your continued whining and 
> threatening to unmerge our code.

Failing to answer a question is hardly a veto.

> And I ask again for your feedback on which approach you think is correct:

> 1) Rewrite the interrupt subsystem of our hypervisor, making it 
> incompatible with full virtualization, so that we can support an 
> abstract interrupt controller with a "clean" interface
> 2) Reuse the same method that HPET, PIT and other time clients in i386 
> use - the global_clock_event pointer which allows you to wrest control 
> back from the APIC and reuse the lapic_events local clockevents.
...

Do all of them then decide which code is nicest. I mean... this looks
like trap question for Ingo. He tells you 2, you'll do crappy
implementation of 2, and then claim Ingo can't object.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/