lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Xen & VMI?
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > btw., while we have everyone on the phone and talking ;) Technologically
    > it would save us a whole lot of trouble in Linux if 'external'
    > hypervisors could standardize around a single ABI - such as VMI. Is
    > there any deep reason why Xen couldnt use VMI to talk to Linux? I
    > suspect a range of VMI vectors could be set aside for Xen's dom0 (and
    > other) APIs that have no current VMI equivalent - if there's broad
    > agreement on the current 60+ base VMI vectors that center around basic
    > x86 CPU capabilities - which make up the largest portion of our
    > paravirtualization complexity. Pipe dream?

    IIRC there was some proof-of-concept at least for xen guests.

    > there are already 5 major hypervisors we are going to support (in
    > alphabetical order):
    >
    > - KVM
    > - lguest
    > - Windows
    > - VMWare
    > - Xen
    >
    > the QA matrix is gonna be a _mess_.

    I fail to see how xen-via-vmirom instead of xen-via-paravirt_ops reduces
    the QA effort. You still have 5 Hypervisors you have to test against.

    cheers,
    Gerd

    --
    Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@suse.de>
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-03-06 09:39    [W:0.024 / U:30.452 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site