Messages in this thread | | | From | Alex Elsayed <> | Subject | Re: [QUERY] lguest64 | Date | Thu, 01 Aug 2013 13:04:22 +0000 |
| |
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> UML, lguest and Xen were done before the x86 architecture supported >> hardware virtualization. > > [...] > >> but on KVM-enabled hardware KVM seems >> like the better option (and is indeed what libguestfs uses.) > > While we're still on the topic, I'd like a few clarifications. From > your reply, I got the impression that KVM the only mechanism for > non-pvops virtualization. This seems quite contrary to what I read on > lwn about ARM virtualization [1]. In short, ARM provides a "hypervisor > mode", and the article says > > "the virtualization model provided by ARM fits the Xen > hypervisor-based virtualization better than KVM's kernel-based model" > > The Xen people call this "ARM PVH" (as opposed to ARM PV, which does > not utilize hardware extensions) [2]. Although I wasn't able to find > much information about the hardware aspect, what ARM provides seems to > be quite different from VT-x and AMD-V. I'm also confused about what > virt/kvm/arm is. > > Thanks. > > [1]: http://lwn.net/Articles/513940/ > [2]: http://www.xenproject.org/developers/teams/arm-hypervisor.html
ARM's virtualization extensions may be a more *natural* match to Xen's semantics and architecture, but that doesn't mean that KVM can't use it. LWN explains the details far better than I can: https://lwn.net/Articles/557132/
virt/kvm/arm is an implementation of KVM (the API) that takes advantage of ARM's virtualization extensions.
| |