[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interface proposal
On Mar 15, 2006, at 11:25 , Christoph Hellwig wrote:
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 webelieve 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.
As part of our pre-virtualization work, we developed a virtualization solution similar to VMI. We support Xen v2 and v3 with high performance. We added support for the first generation of VMI to our project, and are currently adding support for the latest VMI patch. Our work is open source. We'll announce when we finish the VMI updates.
We also experimented with other architectures and found the approach highly suitable, such as for Itanium.
Joshua _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our