KVM steals virtualization spotlight (ZDNet)
Posted Feb 27, 2007 16:11 UTC (Tue) by mmarq
In reply to: KVM steals virtualization spotlight (ZDNet)
Parent article: KVM steals virtualization spotlight (ZDNet)
"" Xen is intrusive and difficult to use and manage in comparision. It took many years for Xen to reach the point were KVM took months. ""
"" And what is this hypervisor versus application layer stuff. Is that FUD or something?... ...So on one side you have Qemu + KVM, Qemu + Kqemu (recently GPL'd) versus Xen on the other. ""
.- KVM is a *Monitor* inside the Linux kernel.
.- Xen is an exokernel derived from the Nemesis OS, running in hypervisor, with the *Monitor Management* stuff inside. I belive Xen is *very natural* at the Monitor thing, because the original idea of an exokernel is already to protect, partition and multiplex the hardware resources, and live the schedular, mem and interrupts management to applications and or libOSes.
Can the two co-exist togheter ?
I belive they can, if the *Monitor Management stuff* stays with KVM, but Linux uses Xen as a domain generator and manager, that is, a VM stays as a Linux process but inside a "Xen" domain !... can Linux use a "Xen hypervisor" to put a VM process inside a protecting domain with migration abilitys ?
Now we would have something like Qemu as a VM ( dont know, but possibly maintaining the ability to emulate Power or Sparc also) as a Linux process but running inside a protection domain with migration abilitys!...
That would be something !...
BETTER, because now if Xen is striped out of the strict Monitor Management function, it can include something like Ipipe, that is, "Xen" switches a VMM for an Ipipe, and everybody will win twice.
Because now we get Linux with a blazing fast VMM stuff with domain migration, and with deterministic hard real-time abilitys!
to post comments)