Cool. I've actually been playing with QEMU internals a lot recently. Specifically with the multi-process experimental features. Although I can't seem to find any consistency on where the main project is headed. They admit that the documentation pages can be well out-of-date with the upstream implementations, but they seem split-brained even within the code.<p>The main project ships with the multi-process qemu approach, mostly defined in their docs:
<a href="https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/multi-process.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/multi-process.html</a>
<a href="https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/multi-process.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/multi-process.html</a><p>But I saw some update buried in a mailing list that development of the multi-process system has been superseded by vfio-user, mostly led by nutanix:
<a href="https://github.com/nutanix/libvfio-user">https://github.com/nutanix/libvfio-user</a><p>The nutanix repo refers to an oracle-led fork of qemu with the full vfio-user implementation built-in:
<a href="https://github.com/oracle/qemu">https://github.com/oracle/qemu</a><p>So, they're still separate projects, right? Well, kinda. the mainline project has the vfio-user-server implementation merged in:
<a href="https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/ac5f7bf8e208cd7893dbb1a9520559e569a4677c/hw/remote/vfio-user-obj.c">https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/ac5f7bf8e208cd7893dbb1a952...</a><p>But not the client side (vfio-user-pci). So, the feature is half-baked in the mainline project.<p>I don't know if any of the qemu devs browse HN but it would be nice to hear more about the plans for vfio-user.
"Since version 3.0.0, QEMU uses a time based version numbering scheme: major incremented by 1 for the first release of the year minor reset to 0 with every major increment, otherwise incremented by 1 for each release from git master micro always 0 for releases from git master, incremented by 1 for each stable branch release"
If I'm reading this right, "master" has more significant part than stable... This feels wrong. What am I missing?
> x86: support for Xen guests under KVM with Linux v5.12+<p>Clearly I haven't been keeping up, because this is a bit of a surprise. Xen under KVM? Those things are polar opposites!