User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project

From:  Anthony Liguori <anthony-AT-codemonkey.ws>
To:  Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>
Subject:  Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project
Date:  Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:50:31 -0500
Cc:  Avi Kivity <avi-AT-redhat.com>, 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>, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, kvm-AT-vger.kernel.org, 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>
Archive-link:  Article, Thread

On 03/21/2010 05:00 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> If that is the theory then it has failed to trickle through in practice. As
> you know i have reported a long list of usability problems with hardly a look.
> That list could be created by pretty much anyone spending a few minutes of
> getting a first impression with qemu-kvm.
>    

I think the point you're missing is that your list was from the perspective
of someone looking at a desktop virtualization solution that had was
graphically oriented.

As Avi has repeatedly mentioned, so far, that has not been the target
audience of QEMU.  The target audience tends to be: 1) people looking to do
server virtualization and 2) people looking to do command line based
development.

Usually, both (1) and (2) are working on machines that are remotely
located.  What's important to these users is that VMs be easily launchable
from the command line, that there is a lot of flexibility in defining
machine types, and that there is a programmatic way to interact with a
given instance of QEMU.  Those are the things that we've been focusing on
recently.

The reason we don't have better desktop virtualization support is simple.
No one is volunteering to do it and no company is funding development for
it.

When you look at something like VirtualBox, what you're looking at is a
long ago forked version of QEMU with a GUI added focusing on desktop
virtualization.

There is no magic behind adding a better, more usable GUI to QEMU.  It just
takes resources.

I understand that you're trying to make the point that without catering to
the desktop virtualization use case, we won't get as many developers as we
could.  Personally, I don't think that argument is accurate.  If you look
at VirtualBox, it's performance is terrible.  Having a nice GUI hasn't
gotten them the type of developers that can improve their performance.

No one is arguing that we wouldn't like to have a nicer UI.  I'd love to
merge any patch like that.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori



(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2010, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds