Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7 v5] VMXNET3 paravirtualized device implementation Interface type "vmxnet3" added.

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Anthony Liguori <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 04/10/2012 10:47 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
>> <address@hidden>  wrote:
>>>
>>> What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
>>> accomplished...
>>> What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
>>
>>
>> Hang on, I asked what the point of the VMware paravirt device models
>> is.  I don't think that was ever answered fully.
>
>
> As long as the code is high quality and there's a test suite to go along
> with it, I think adding additional device emulation is perfectly fine.
>
> I don't think *inventing* new paravirtual devices is a good idea but this is
> just like someone submitting BNX emulation.  Emulating a wide variety of
> devices is what we do.

The discussion I'm trying to get is: how does adding VMware emulated
devices get us closer to solving v2v?

I think the answer is that it doesn't but I'm curious to find out more
about how exactly this fits in to a v2v process.

Stefan