[libvirt] [Qemu-devel] Re: Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt

Avi Kivity avi at redhat.com
Wed Mar 24 19:49:45 UTC 2010

On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200
> Avi Kivity<avi at redhat.com>  wrote:
>> So, at best qemud is a toy for people who are annoyed by libvirt.
>   Is the reason for doing this in qemu because libvirt is annoying?


> I don't see
> how adding yet another layer/daemon is going to improve ours and user's life
> (the same applies for libqemu).

libvirt becomes optional.

>   If I got it right, there were two complaints from the kvm-devel flamewar:
> 1. Qemu has usability problems
> 2. There's no way an external tool can get /proc/kallsyms info from Qemu
>   I don't see how libqemu can help with 1) and having qemud doesn't seem
> the best solution for 2) either.
>   Still talking about 2), what's wrong in getting the PID or having a QMP
> connection in a well known location as suggested by Anthony?

I now believe that's the best option.

Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

More information about the libvir-list mailing list