On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:34:41PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote: > > On 20 Aug 2015, at 15:43, Markus Pargmann <mpa@...1897...> wrote: > > > > > it seems qemu-nbd has a complete separate implementation of NBD. Does > > anyone know what the state of qemu-nbd and its differences to > > nbd-server/client is? > > > > I am wondering why there is a second implementation. Wouldn't it be > > better to have a single implementation with more test coverage and > > contributions? > > On the server side, qemu-nbd and friends are built around some quite > complex coroutine stuff unique to qemu, and use an interesting backend > that supports various on disk file formats (qcow etc.) nbd-server itself > is much simpler. > > In terms of the client code, qemu's is userland, nbd's is mostly > kernel side. > > I think it's thus not going to be practical to merge them (but qemu-devel > is where you'd need to ask). Thanks for clarifying. > > Actually, having two interoperating implementations is a *good* thing > as far as maintaining a standard is concerned. I am not sure if it is so important to have a standard rather than having a robust and well tested implementation. We care already about the standard by avoiding to break compatibility between different server/client versions and kernel versions. Best regards, Markus > > -- > Alex Bligh > > > > -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature