[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing
From: |
Paul Moore |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing |
Date: |
Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:50:05 -0500 |
User-agent: |
KMail/4.7.3 (Linux/3.0.11-gentoo; KDE/4.7.3; x86_64; ; ) |
On Friday, December 09, 2011 06:46:59 PM Paul Brook wrote:
> > > Last time I checked at least one of the Intel/AMD schemes had been
> > > implemented, through I don't know if it's been merged, or had any
> > > serious performance tuning. My main intent was to raise this as a
> > > potentially viable alternative. Someone who actually cares about
> > > the answer can figure out the details and cobble together some
> > > benchmarks :-)>
> >
> > Well, if we see no answers and see no interest it probably isn't a
> > viable alternative as no interest typically means no code.
>
> You're using circular logic. Based on that theory your proposal isn't
> viable either. If it was someone would have done it laready!
Did you miss the part where we are working on a prototype? To me that signals
interest and code.
--
paul moore
virtualization @ redhat
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, (continued)
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Blue Swirl, 2011/12/08
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Brook, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Moore, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Brook, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Moore, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Brook, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing,
Paul Moore <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Brook, 2011/12/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Paul Moore, 2011/12/09
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Blue Swirl, 2011/12/10
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device sandboxing, Avi Kivity, 2011/12/11