Notes: 2026-06-04 CC Virtualization Maintenance subgroup

[Julianus Larson]

Hi,

Here are the meeting notes from the first meeting with the CoreCollective Virtualization Maintenance subgroup. I have also included Ilias' presentation.

Best regards,

Julianus Larson

Quick recap

This meeting focused on discussing maintenance issues for the Core Collective virtualization working group, with Ilias presenting a proposal for funding common maintenance areas across QEMU projects. The group debated whether the scope should be limited to ARM-specific maintenance or include broader virtualization ecosystem maintenance, with Mark questioning the boundaries of Core Collective's involvement in non-ARM related maintenance tasks. Alex clarified that while Linaro already covers ARM-specific maintenance, there are gaps in areas like USB support, CI coverage, and certain subsystems that affect the ARM ecosystem but aren't ARM-specific. The discussion revealed tension between maintaining architectural focus and addressing broader open source collaboration needs, with participants ultimately agreeing that any maintenance work beneficial to the ARM ecosystem should be considered within scope. The group decided to postpone further discussions until after other sub-working groups (FFA and Virtio) have their initial meetings, and agreed to continue using the existing virtualization Google group for communications rather than creating a separate maintenance-specific group at this time.

Next steps

Don

• Continue work on setting up the new platform for group communications, and coordinate temporary Google group/email usage as needed

Julianus

• Schedule the next maintenance group meeting in two weeks, after all subgroups have met

Ilias

• Collect additional suggestions from group members about projects or subsystems that need maintenance support, via email or list, and update the list accordingly
• Clean up the maintenance list to remove items group members are not interested in supporting

Collaboration

• lias and Alex: Prepare and update the list of currently well-maintained ARM architecture items and identify gaps for the next meeting
• All subgroup chairs: In upcoming subgroup meetings, collect and highlight what needs maintenance, especially items that are architecturally specific and those that are supportive to multiple architectures
• All members: Review and respond to the survey sent by Alex to the Core Collective Virtualization mailing list regarding ARM machine models, devices, and features of interest

Summary

Presentation Planning and Updates

Ilias prepared a presentation on unmaintained areas but expressed uncertainty about additional ideas for virtualization maintenance. The group discussed upcoming presentations, including one on emulation scheduled for next week. Due to Ilia's forgotten laptop, Julianus agreed to present the slides that Ilia had already shared via email.

Virtualization Maintenance Funding Proposal

Ilias presented on the challenges facing maintenance in virtualization projects, highlighting issues with underfunding, overworked maintenance teams, declining code quality, and increasing security vulnerabilities. He proposed creating a fund from interested parties to support common areas of interest, particularly focusing on core maintenance of subsystems like USB, ACPI, and user mode emulation. Ilias also suggested funding CI coverage improvements, noting current gaps in coverage across different platforms.

Xen Safety Project Categorization Discussion

Stefano and Ilias discussed whether Xen safety fits under maintenance efforts, with Ilias questioning if it should be categorized differently since it doesn't align with strict maintenance activities. The group reviewed slides about QEMU and other projects, with Mark questioning the relevance of the work for Core Collective and suggesting that removing non-ARM solutions from the list would leave little content for the group to focus on.

QEMU Maintenance Gaps Discussion

The group discussed maintenance gaps in QEMU that affect the ARM ecosystem but are not specifically ARM-related. Alex explained that while areas like ACPI and ARM ACPI subsystems are ARM-specific, other components like USB, firmware config, and user mode emulation affect multiple architectures. Bill questioned whether the list of non-ARM maintenance issues was relevant to Core Collective's focus, given that most of their work is already ARM-specific and funded. The discussion highlighted the challenge of determining which maintenance tasks should be prioritized under Core Collective's ARM ecosystem focus.

Scope of Work Discussion

The group discussed what should be included in their scope of work, with Bill clarifying that items important to the ARM ecosystem should be included regardless of whether they're ARM-specific. Mark raised concerns about potential duplication of effort if similar work were done for other architectures like RISC-V, suggesting that an architecture-independent organization might be more effective. Ilia proposed working with Alex to prepare a list of currently maintained items for the next meeting.

ARM Maintenance Priorities Discussion

The group discussed maintenance priorities for ARM-related projects within Core Collective, focusing on what items are important to the ARM ecosystem versus other architectures. They agreed to wait for other sub-working groups to meet before making final decisions about maintenance priorities, with Alex noting that ARM-specific CI testing and hypervisor support are currently underfunded areas that need attention. The group decided to continue using the existing virtualization Google group for communications rather than creating a separate maintenance-specific group, and Julianus agreed to schedule the next meeting in two weeks after all subgroups have their initial meetings.