From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Roadmap for KVM support on Tile?
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 17:13:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CFD0B9D.6020809@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CFD0857.8050205@tilera.com>
Am 06.12.2010 16:59, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 12/6/2010 7:13 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> as I'm already running around, telling people that Tile might be the
>> next arch to gain KVM support, I wanted to back this derived [1]
>> information with some more details. Can you share some of your plans
>> regarding this, either officially (LKML, kvm-devel) or yet privately?
>> - What will be the level of support in the first version and long-term
>> (CPU virtualization + I/O emulation, also I/O virtualization/
>> pass-though)?
>> - What use cases do you target, and why do you plan to use KVM for
>> them?
>> - What use cases may not fit a KVM-based approach?
>>
>> The background of this questionnaire is not (yet) a concrete project
>> based on a Tile processor and KVM. Right now I'm primarily promoting KVM
>> for use cases beyond classic x86 server scenarios, both in-house as well
>> as in the community.
>>
>> TiA!
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jan Kiszka
>>
>> [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1048568
>
> We already have a hypervisor that is used for Tile, which allows us to do
> client isolation and spatial multiplexing (i.e. splitting the cores among
> different supervisors), and smooths over some of the more nitty-gritty
> hardware issues to present an easier API to the client supervisor, e.g.
> Linux. The supervisor is paravirtualized, i.e. aware of the hypervisor API
> for page-table management and I/O access.
>
> But moving forward there is some appeal to using a standard virtualization
> technology, and we picked KVM as the target that seemed best for us to
> support. Some of the things this will facilitate for us include dynamic
> reconfiguration of supervisor domains, sharing I/O devices between
> supervisors, providing virtual devices to supervisors, virtual machine
> migration/snapshots, etc. And, we'd like to support a standard management
> interface such as the KVM interface, so our customers don't have to learn
> how to manage the Tilera-specific hypervisor software.
>
> None of this is committed to any particular release schedule yet, but this
> is the direction we are currently planning to head.
>
Thanks for the information! Sound thrilling, looking forward seeing this
materializing.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-06 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4CFCD363.7060803@siemens.com>
2010-12-06 15:59 ` Roadmap for KVM support on Tile? Chris Metcalf
2010-12-06 16:13 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4CFD0B9D.6020809@siemens.com \
--to=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox