Steffen Liebergeld wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Paul Brook schrieb: >> On Friday 14 November 2008, Steffen Liebergeld wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am currently researching of whether or not it is feasible to port kqemu >>> to the ARM platform. The website says qemu on ARM hosts is in >>> "testing"-state. Does that still apply to the latest svn-Version? >> Should just about work, though you should expect bugs. > >> However I advise using KVM and not kqemu. KVM has already been merged to >> upstream kernels, and the chances of getting another hypervisor interface >> merged are approximately zero. > > KVM is not an option for me (and is not available for the ARM-platform). (...so is KQEMU) > I plan to port kqemu for the ARM-platform. Do have any estimates, for how much > work would be needed to adopt the kqemu-Interface of qemu (which is > x86-centric) to ARM (ignoring the effort needed to port the > kqemu-kernel-module)? You should start with studying both KVM and KQEMU in more details. Before thinking about which interface to implement, first clarify what approach you actually need for ARM. I don't think that arch is as weird as x86. Virtualization-wise it will rather be close to PowerPC e.g. And for PowerPC (440) there is already kvm support... But even if you had to implement a KQEMU-comparable VMM for ARM, you should definitely use KVM's interface and infrastructure (which goes beyond KQEMU). Rather extend it if that's required. Only that way your work would have a chance to become mainline and benefit from the ongoing development in KVM and QEMU. Believe us. :) Jan