Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/49] Initial support of multi-process qemu - status update

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 20/12/19 10:47, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> If it doesn't create too large of a burden to support both, then I think
>> it is very desirable. IIUC, this is saying a kernel based solution as the
>> optimized/optimal solution, and userspace UNIX socket based option as the
>> generic "works everywhere" fallback solution.
> I'm slightly in favor of the kernel implementation because it keeps us
> better aligned with VFIO.  That means solving problems in one place only
> and less reinventing the wheel.

I think there are anyway going to be some differences with VFIO.

For example, currently VFIO requires pinning user memory.  Is that a
limitation for muser too?  If so, that would be a big disadvantage; if
not, however, management tools need to learn that muser devices unlike
other VFIO devices do not prevent overcommit.

Paolo