[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALkWK0=T6aqpqHKf=601EPc9+4cvgJ053xBU2HxmJuf2dVXoxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 22:52:02 +0530
From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [QUERY] lguest64
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> UML, lguest and Xen were done before the x86 architecture supported
> hardware virtualization.
[...]
> but on KVM-enabled hardware KVM seems
> like the better option (and is indeed what libguestfs uses.)
While we're still on the topic, I'd like a few clarifications. From
your reply, I got the impression that KVM the only mechanism for
non-pvops virtualization. This seems quite contrary to what I read on
lwn about ARM virtualization [1]. In short, ARM provides a "hypervisor
mode", and the article says
"the virtualization model provided by ARM fits the Xen
hypervisor-based virtualization better than KVM's kernel-based model"
The Xen people call this "ARM PVH" (as opposed to ARM PV, which does
not utilize hardware extensions) [2]. Although I wasn't able to find
much information about the hardware aspect, what ARM provides seems to
be quite different from VT-x and AMD-V. I'm also confused about what
virt/kvm/arm is.
Thanks.
[1]: http://lwn.net/Articles/513940/
[2]: http://www.xenproject.org/developers/teams/arm-hypervisor.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists