From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Hopwood Subject: Re: running Windows (albeit slowly) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:08:24 +0000 Message-ID: <41A4C008.1000003@blueyonder.co.uk> References: <41A480BA.7060202@harvee.org> Reply-To: david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Mark Williamson wrote: >> Under the opinion that there is no crime if optimization fails on >> incorrect code, would it not be appropriate to do all the things >> necessary to run Windows unmodified albeit poorly slash slowly? > > It's not just that the modifications improve performance, guests > actually need to be modified to work on Xen at all. Supporting full virtualization on x86 is *much* more complicated than Xen-style paravirtualization, mainly because the x86 has some instructions that are not privileged, but reveal state that needs to be virtualized. > When Intel's VT extensions come out, supporting unmodified guests will > be rather easier. Is there any information available on what the extensions will be? > Yeah, speech recognition on Linux (and others) is a bit of a pain. There was recently a big fanfare about IBM open-sourcing some of their speech recognition code, but I don't know how much development it needs. -- David Hopwood ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/