Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:59:19 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: Xen is a feature |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > The point? Xen really is horribly badly separated out. It gets way more > incestuous with other systems than it should. It's entirely possible that > this is very fundamental to both paravirtualization and to hypervisor > behavior, but it doesn't matter - it just measn that I can well see that > Xen is a f*cking pain to merge. > > So please, Xen people, look at your track record, and look at the issues > from the standpoint of somebody merging your code, rather than just from > the standpoint of somebody who whines "I want my code to be merged". > > IOW, if you have trouble getting your code merged, ask yourself what _you_ > are doing wrong. >
There is in fact a way to get dom0 support with nearly no changes to Linux, but it involves massive changes to Xen itself and requires hardware support: run dom0 as a fully virtualized guest, and assign it all the resources dom0 can access. It's probably a massive effort though.
I've considered it for kvm when faced with the "I want a thin hypervisor" question: compile the hypervisor kernel with PCI support but nothing else (no CONFIG_BLOCK or CONFIG_NET, no device drivers), load userspace from initramfs, and assign host devices to one or more privileged guests. You could probably run the host with a heavily stripped configuration, and enjoy the slimness while every interrupt invokes the scheduler, a context switch, and maybe an IPI for good measure.
-- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
| |