From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: aq Subject: Re: Microsoft plans 'hypervisor' for Longhorn Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 20:55:40 -0500 Message-ID: <9cde8bff0506071855da91ac7@mail.gmail.com> References: <000b01c56bc5$b6a1bef0$0201a8c0@hawk> Reply-To: aq Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 08 Jun 2005 02:21:04 +0100, M.A. Williamson wrote: > > Article mentions Xen as Microsoft's competition. >=20 > The MS hypervisor is a very interesting beast from our PoV: * drivers run > in a dom0-like "parent" partition (cut down Longhorn) * "child" partition= s > devices are plumbed through this * VMM-aware OSes can use APIs called > "enlightenments" (don't you usually achieve enlightenment through > practising Zen? :-D) to avoid full-virt penalties >=20 > Their roadmap includes live migration and suspend-resume, USB > virtualisation, etc. >=20 > It'll be interesting to see if they require hypervisor-enabled hardware o= r > if they pull in the binary scanning / rewriting from VirtualPC. It'll als= o > be interesting to see just how open their "open" device / VMM interfaces > are: in particular, can Linux support them as a guest, can Xen fake them > out to boost performance when running Longhorn guests? yeah, i like this point: the chance for Xen to fake their hypervisor to run Longhorn is really interesting ;-) regards, aq