|| ||Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu> |
|| ||Avi Kivity <avi-AT-redhat.com> |
|| ||Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project |
|| ||Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:46:50 +0100|
|| ||Anthony Liguori <anthony-AT-codemonkey.ws>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg-AT-cs.helsinki.fi>,
"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang-AT-linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl>,
Sheng Yang <sheng-AT-linux.intel.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti-AT-redhat.com>,
oerg Roedel <joro-AT-8bytes.org>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen-AT-redhat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb-AT-redhat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden-AT-redhat.com>, ziteng.huang-AT-intel.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme-AT-redhat.com>,
Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <fweisbec-AT-gmail.com>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins-AT-novell.com>|
|| ||Article, Thread
* Avi Kivity <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 03/22/2010 09:27 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> If your position basically boils down to, we can't trust userspace
> >> and we can always trust the kernel, I want to eliminate any
> >> userspace path, then I can't really help you out.
> > Why would you want to 'help me out'? I can tell a good solution from a bad
> > one just fine.
> You are basically making a kernel implementation a requirement, instead of
> something that follows from the requirement.
No, i'm not.
> > You should instead read the long list of disadvantages above, invert them
> > and list then as advantages for the kernel-based vcpu enumeration
> > solution, apply common sense and go admit to yourself that indeed in this
> > situation a kernel provided enumeration of vcpu contexts is the most
> > robust solution.
> Having qemu enumerate guests one way or another is not a good idea IMO since
> it is focused on one guest and doesn't have a system-wide entity. A
> userspace system-wide entity will work just as well as kernel
> implementation, without its disadvantages.
A system-wide user-space entity only solves one problem out of the 4 i listed,
still leaving the other 3:
- Those special files can get corrupted, mis-setup, get out of sync, or can
be hard to discover.
- Apps might start KVM vcpu instances without adhering to the
system-wide access method.
- There is no guarantee for the system-wide process to reply to a request -
while the kernel can always guarantee an enumeration result. I dont want
'perf kvm' to hang or misbehave just because the system-wide entity has
Really, i think i have to give up and not try to convince you guys about this
anymore - i dont think you are arguing constructively anymore and i dont want
yet another pointless flamewar about this.
Please consider 'perf kvm' scrapped indefinitely, due to lack of robust KVM
instrumentation features: due to lack of robust+universal vcpu/guest
enumeration and due to lack of robust+universal symbol access on the KVM side.
It was a really promising feature IMO and i invested two days of arguments
into it trying to find a workable solution, but it was not to be.
to post comments)