Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Kernel-based Virtual Machine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 03:45:49PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:

The following patchset adds a driver for Intel's hardware virtualization
extensions to the x86 architecture.  The driver adds a character device
(/dev/kvm) that exposes the virtualization capabilities to userspace.  Using
this driver, a process can run a virtual machine (a "guest") in a fully
virtualized PC containing its own virtual hard disks, network adapters, and
display.

Hi,

Looks pretty interesting! some comments:

- patch 4/7 hasn't made it to the list?
- it would be useful for reviewing this if you could post example code
  making use of the /dev/kvm interfaces - they seem fairly complex.
- why do it this way rather than through a virtual machine monitor
  such as Xen? what do you gain from having the virtual machines
  encapsulated as Linux processes?

With VT (or even SVM) you gain nothing from having a microkernel based hypervisor. With paravirtualization, having a hypervisor that fits into 64mb of address space is critical for reducing the cost of hypercalls (to avoid tlb flushes).

With both VT and SVM, address space switching is mandatory. Since this is already occurring, switching to a microkernel (like Xen) has no performance benefit to switching to a macrokernel (like Linux).

Not to mention, many of VT/SVM performance problems in Xen are related to the amount of switching required to service IO requests (from HVM domain, to hypervisor, to dom0 kernel, then to dom0 userspace). Compared to KVM where you only switch from guest, to kernel, to userspace and I find it highly likely that this is a faster approach.

There are some reasons why you may still want a hypervisor (resource isolation and scheduler guarantees) but there's nothing fundamental that keeps one from adding those to Linux.

This is definitely good stuff. Too much of it is just taken from Xen though and ought to be thought out a little more but for what it's worth, I think this is the right idea.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Cheers,
Muli


-
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/


-
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]
  Powered by Linux