[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization

To:	Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interface proposal
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:25:22 +0000
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Joshua LeVasseur <jtl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pratap Subrahmanyam <pratap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Jack Lo <jlo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>, Leendert van Doorn <leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Anne Holler <anne@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kip Macy <kmacy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Arai <arai@xxxxxxxxxx>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date:	Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:30:06 +0000
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<4415B857.9010902@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Mail-followup-to:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Arai <arai@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anne Holler <anne@xxxxxxxxxx>, Pratap Subrahmanyam <pratap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Joshua LeVasseur <jtl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Rik Van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jack Lo <jlo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kip Macy <kmacy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>, Leendert van Doorn <leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References:	<200603131758.k2DHwQM7005618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1142273346.3023.38.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4415B857.9010902@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mutt/1.4.2.1i

On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:22:15AM -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> >Why can't vmware use the Xen interface instead?
> >  
> 
> We could.  But it is our opinion that the Xen interface is unnecessarily 
> complicated, without a clean separation between the layer of interaction 
> with the hypervisor and the kernel proper.  The interface we propose we 
> believe is more powerful, and more conducive to performance 
> optimizations while providing significant advantages - most 
> specifically, a single binary image that is properly virtualizable on 
> multiple hypervisors and capable of running on native hardware.

I agree with Zach here, the Xen hypervisor <-> kernel interface is
not very nice.  This proposal seems like a step forward althogh it'll
probably need to go through a few iterations.  Without and actually
useable opensource hypevisor reference implementation it's totally
unacceptable, though.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interfac