xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary |
From: |
David Lang <dlang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Fri, 4 Aug 2006 13:31:47 -0700 (PDT) |
Cc: |
Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, zach@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jlo@xxxxxxxxxx, greg@xxxxxxxxx, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Antonio Vargas <windenntw@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxx, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 07 Aug 2006 02:22:36 -0700 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<44D3A9F3.2000000@xxxxxxxx> |
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> |
References: |
<44D1CC7D.4010600@xxxxxxxxxx> <20060803190605.GB14237@xxxxxxxxx> <44D24DD8.1080006@xxxxxxxxxx> <20060803200136.GB28537@xxxxxxxxx> <44D2B678.6060400@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060803211850.3a01d0cc.akpm@xxxxxxxx> <1154667875.11382.37.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060803225357.e9ab5de1.akpm@xxxxxxxx> <1154675100.11382.47.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608040944480.18902@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <69304d110608041146t44077033j9a10ae6aee19a16d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608041150360.18862@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44D39F73.8000803@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608041239430.18862@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44D3A9F3.2000000@xxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
so if I understand this correctly we are saying that a kernel compiled to
run on hypervisor A would need to be recompiled to run on hypervisor B, and
recompiled again to run on hypervisor C, etc
where A could be bare hardware, B could be Xen 2, C could be Xen 3, D could
be vmware, E could be vanilla Linux, etc.
Yes, but you can compile one kernel for any set of hypervisors, so if you
want both Xen and VMI, then compile both in. (You always get bare hardware
support.)
how can I compile in support for Xen4 on my 2.6.18 kernel? after all xen 2 and
xen3 are incompatable hypervisors so why wouldn't xen4 (and I realize there is
no xen4 yet, but there is likly to be one during the time virtual servers
created with 2.6.18 are still running)
this sounds like something that the distros would not support, they would
pick their one hypervisor to support and leave out the others. the big
problem with this is that the preferred hypervisor will change over time
and people will be left with incompatable choices (or having to compile
their own kernels, including having to recompile older kernels to support
newer hypervisors)
Why? That's like saying that distros will only bother to compile in one scsi
driver.
The hypervisor driver is tricker than a normal kernel device driver, because
in general it needs to be present from very early in boot, which precludes it
from being a normal module. There's hope that we'll be able to support
hypervisor drivers as boot-time grub/multiboot modules, so you'll be able to
compile up a new hypervisor driver for a particular kernel and use it without
recompiling the whole thing.
distros don't offer kernels with all options today, why would they in the future
(how many distros offer seperate 486/586/K6/K7/Pentium/P2/P3/P4 kernels, none.
they offer a least-common denominator kernel or two instead)
I also am missing something here. how can a system be compiled to do several
different things for the same privilaged opcode (including running that opcode)
without turning that area of code into a performance pig as it checks for each
possible hypervisor being present?
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, (continued)
- Message not available
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Antonio Vargas
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Arjan van de Ven
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary,
David Lang <=
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Bill Rugolsky Jr.
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Arjan van de Ven
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Jeff Dike
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, Jeff Dike
- [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary, David Lang
Message not available
|
|
|