Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Ross S. W. Walker, le Tue 01 Apr 2008 11:41:24 -0400, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Ross S. W. Walker, le Tue 01 Apr 2008 11:19:35 -0400, a écrit :
> > > > I was wondering if now that the kqemu source has been GPL'd if it was
> > > > possible if it's functionality could be incorporated into the Xen
> > > > hypervisor to provide full virtualization on hardware that doesn't
> > > > support it?
> > >
> > > What would be the benefit, compared to just running qemu in
> > > user space?
> Oooh, oops, you are talking about *k*qemu, not qemu, sorry, ok, I see.
> Well, a first step would be to make kqemu work with Xen's dom0 Linux.
> Then, adding the feature in the Hypervisor may make sense indeed, but
> I'm not sure you'd get much bigger performance than with just the dom0
Yes, you are probably right here. The hypervisor should probably just
"allow" the existence of the kqemu kernel module in dom0 by recognizing
it and allowing it to do it's thing without either hypervisor stepping
on each other, and no, integrating it in the xen kernel would not
provide any more performance then dom0 I believe, it merely means that
the kernel can do full virtualization without the addition of another
I have always wondered why the xen developers decided to keep the qemu
name for the domain device provider after they have completely gutted
and pratically rewritten the original code?
How about calling it just 'dm' for domain manager?
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.
Xen-devel mailing list