[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] VIRTIO - compatibility with different virtualization solutions
Hey, On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:01:19PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Anthony Liguori <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Below you could find a summary of work in regards to VIRTIO compatibility > >>> with > >>> different virtualization solutions. It was done mainly from Xen point of > >>> view > >>> but results are quite generic and can be applied to wide spectrum > >>> of virtualization platforms. > >> > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> Sorry for the delayed response, I was pondering... CC changed > >> to virtio-dev. Do not worry. It is not a problem. It is not easy issue. > >> From a standard POV: It's possible to abstract out the where we use > >> 'physical address' for 'address handle'. It's also possible to define > >> this per-platform (ie. Xen-PV vs everyone else). This is sane, since > >> Xen-PV is a distinct platform from x86. > > > > I'll go even further and say that "address handle" doesn't make sense too. > > I was trying to come up with a unique term, I wasn't trying to define > semantics :) > > There are three debates here now: (1) what should the standard say, and Yep. > (2) how would Linux implement it, It seems to me that we should think about other common OSes too. > (3) should we use each platform's PCI IOMMU. I do not want emulate any hardware. It seems to me that we should think about something which fits best in VIRTIO environment. DMA API with relevant backends looks promising but I have also some worries about performance. Additionally, it is Linux Kernel specific stuff so maybe we should invent something more generic which will fit well in other guest OSes too. [...] > It's a fundamental assumption of virtio that the host can access all of > guest memory. That's paravert, not a hack. Why? What if guests would like to limit access to their memory? I think that it will happen sooner or later. Additionally, I think that your assumption is not hypervisor agnostic which limits implementation of VIRTIO spec. At least for Xen your idea will make difficulties and probably prevent VRITIO implementation. Daniel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |