* address@hidden (address@hidden) wrote:
On 2019-11-01 01:52, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 at 14:26, <address@hidden> wrote:
> > As the author of Looking Glass, I also have to consider the
> > maintenance
> > and the complexity of implementing the vhost protocol into the
> > project.
> > At this time a complete Porthole client can be implemented in 150
> > lines
> > of C without external dependencies, and most of that is boilerplate
> > socket code. This IMO is a major factor in deciding to avoid
> > vhost-user.
>
> This is essentially a proposal that we should make our project and
> code more complicated so that your project and code can be simpler.
> I hope you can see why this isn't necessarily an argument that will hold
> very much weight for us :-)
Certainly, I do which is why I am still going to see about using
vhost,
however, a device that uses vhost is likely more complex then the
device
as it stands right now and as such more maintenance would be involved
on
your end also. Or have I missed something in that vhost-user can be
used
directly as a device?
The basic vhost-user stuff isn't actually that hard; if you aren't
actually shuffling commands over the queues you should find it pretty
simple - so I think your assumption about it being simpler if you avoid
it might be wrong. It might be easier if you use it!