From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NdQoD-0002RD-BW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:13:29 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34617 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NdQoC-0002Qe-U9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:13:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NdQoB-0007qv-2d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:13:28 -0500 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:39470) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NdQoA-0007ph-NO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:13:26 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 16:13:21 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: kqemu and XP guest - lock-up at mup.sys Message-ID: <20100205161321.GA18601@shareable.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B6C1E60.7000305@bobich.net> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gordan Bobic Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Gordan Bobic wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: > >Gordan Bobic wrote: > >Due to limitations of the x86 architecture, kqemu used to be far a way > >from providing accurate virtualization. > > KVM is subject to the same limitations, though, so that point is a bit > moot. No, it isn't. The VT/SVM extensions used by KVM support much more accurate virtualisation than the tricks used by kqemu. There are a few bugs and omissions in KVM itself, but for most things it's a high quality virtualisation. -- Jamie