Messages in this thread | | | From | "Nakajima, Jun" <> | Date | Tue, 7 Oct 2008 15:30:10 -0700 | Subject | RE: [RFC] CPUID usage for interaction between Hypervisors and Linux. |
| |
On 10/3/2008 5:35:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Nakajima, Jun wrote: > > > > What's the significance of supporting multiple interfaces to the > > same guest simultaneously, i.e. _runtime_? We don't want the guests > > to run on such a literarily Frankenstein machine. And practically, > > such testing/debugging would be good only for Halloween :-). > > > > By that notion, EVERY CPU currently shipped is a "Frankenstein" CPU, > since at very least they export Intel-derived and AMD-derived interfaces. > This is in other words, a ridiculous claim.
The big difference here is that you could create a VM at runtime (by combining the existing interfaces) that did not exist before (or was not tested before). For example, a hypervisor could show hyper-v, osx-v (if any), linux-v, etc., and a guest could create a VM with hyper-v MMU, osx-v interrupt handling, Linux-v timer, etc. And such combinations/variations can grow exponentially.
Or are you suggesting that multiple interfaces be _available_ to guests at runtime but the guest chooses one of them?
> -hpa > . Jun Nakajima | Intel Open Source Technology Center
| |