qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Spice project is now open


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Spice project is now open
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 09:03:26 -0600
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090825)

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
About the discussion of improving VNC, this code has to change and
move so fast (you can see already requests from Alexander to split the
features to allow remote usb from remote qlx, it's expectable code to
change for the better to support more obscure features than 99% of
userbase cares about as it goes open), it's huge, it's unreasonable to
pretend to make official modifications to VNC protocol every time we
do a small change to the protocol to please Alexander or anybody other
reasonable wishes of the day, even vnc could eventually reach
equivalent speedup (which is debatable too). Going the vnc route and
official feature requests to extend the protocol is a dead hand IMHO,
all you can argue is spice or something else separate from vnc.

What I really want is a high quality paper comparing Spice to other options (like VNC) with performance graphs demonstrating why it's so much better. A paper isn't really necessary but what I'd like to see is that level of detailed comparison.

Spice has been closed source for a long time. For those that have been involved with Spice development, I'm sure you understand very well why it's so wonderful, but for the rest of us, Spice didn't exist until yesterday so it's going to take a little bit for us to all understand what actually about it makes it special.

And with respect to the spice protocol, what's the model around making changes to the specification? Is it just submit a patch to the spice project? You complain about VNC's extensibility, but so far, we have no idea whether it's even possible to extend Spice. Given the interactions so far, I'm a little concerned about how well we can influence the protocol.

If spice really needs to be able to evolve on it's own, what would it take for spice to be implementable from an external process? What level of interaction does it need with qemu? As long as we can prevent any device state from escaping from qemu, I'd be very interested in a model where spice lived entirely in a separate address space.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]