From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@us.ibm.com>
To: virtualization@lists.osdl.org
Cc: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@oracle.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>,
Christopher Li <chrisl@vmware.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Anne Holler <anne@vmware.com>,
Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@vmware.com>, Kip Macy <kmacy@fsmware.com>,
Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@novell.com>,
Leendert van Doorn <leendert@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interface proposal
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:56:49 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603131256.51854.hollisb@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4415BA4F.3040307@vmware.com>
On Monday 13 March 2006 12:30, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> It is an advantage for everyone. It cuts support and certification
> costs for Linux distributors, software vendors, makes debugging and
> development easier, and gives hypervisors room to grow while maintaining
> binary compatibility with already released kernels.
It certainly is good for kernel developers and end-users.
However, it would be a foolish distributor or ISV who tests with one
hypervisor and decides that covers all hypervisors which implement the same
interface. So I'm not sure there's any advantage w.r.t. support and
certification costs.
--
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-13 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-13 17:58 Zachary Amsden
2006-03-13 18:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-13 18:22 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-13 18:26 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-13 18:30 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-13 18:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-13 18:48 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-13 19:02 ` Chris Wright
2006-03-13 18:56 ` Joshua LeVasseur
2006-03-16 18:52 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-03-13 18:56 ` Hollis Blanchard [this message]
2006-03-13 18:59 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-15 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-15 15:57 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-15 17:38 ` Joshua LeVasseur
2006-03-15 20:02 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-16 0:05 ` Joshua LeVasseur
2006-03-13 20:17 ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-14 0:39 ` Anthony Liguori
2006-03-14 4:01 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-14 4:04 ` Rik van Riel
2006-03-14 4:55 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-14 4:13 ` Anthony Liguori
2006-03-14 4:26 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-14 4:30 ` Rik van Riel
2006-03-14 5:46 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-14 12:44 ` Rik van Riel
2006-03-14 16:22 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-16 18:58 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-03-17 15:56 Chuck Ebbert
2006-03-17 17:52 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-03-20 22:03 Anne Holler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603131256.51854.hollisb@us.ibm.com \
--to=hollisb@us.ibm.com \
--cc=anne@vmware.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=chrisl@vmware.com \
--cc=chrisw@osdl.org \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=jreddy@vmware.com \
--cc=kmacy@fsmware.com \
--cc=ksrinivasan@novell.com \
--cc=leendert@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=wim.coekaerts@oracle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=zach@vmware.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome