* Anthony Liguori ([email protected]) wrote:
> Chris Wright wrote:
> >Xen also provides support for running directly on native hardware.
>
> Can someone elaborate on this? Does this mean a Xen guest can run on
> bare metal?
Yes. See the Xen code for running the kernel in ring0 with Xen
(supervisor_mode_kenel). The hypercall_page is conditionally filled
with hypercall traps or direct calls basically.
> Is there code available to make this work (it doesn't seem contained in
> this patchset)? Has any performance analysis been done?
I don't have any numbers.
> The numbers that have been posted with the VMI patches suggest that some
> rather tricky stuff is required to achieve native performance when
> running a guest on bare metal. If this is not the case, it would be
> very interesting to know because it seems to be the hairiest part of the
> VMI patches.
It is a hairy part of VMI. They've done a nice job of handling the
native case, and have interseting plans for improving the non-native
case (inline where possible). One of the differences is things that
don't actually require hypercalls are already inline w/ Xen. So it's
conceivable that the performance hit is smaller than what VMI found
without carefully inlining native code.
> Otherwise, if we want to support Xen guests on bare metal, it seems we
> would have to change things in the subarch code a bit to do something
> similar to VMI.
It's a different approach.
thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
