Re: [Qemu-devel] About qemu emulation speed (a question) and supported OS

[Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>]

Jim C. Brown wrote:

>On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 09:58:11AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>  
>
>>Jim C. Brown wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Fabrice had said that he > >wants
>>>kqemu to be able to do total virtualization (both kernel and userland > >bits);
>>>basically all the translation code of qemu would be left unused but the 
>>>hardware> >emulation would still be shared.
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I reckon this means taking advantage of VT and Pacifica when they're 
>>available so the kernel code can be safely run on bare metal.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>No, I got the impression that Fabrice was taking about virtualization the way
>VMware, old plex86, and vmbear (new FOSS x86 virtualizer in the works) do it.
>  
>
The x86 cannot be "virtualized" in the Popek/Goldberg sense, so there's 
a couple of fast emulation techniques that are possible.  Other than a 
hand coded dynamic translator, I reckon qemu + kqemu is about as good as 
it can get (unless I'm missing something here).  Do you have

There are a couple of interesting paravirtualization techniques too.  
There's the Xen approach (really fast, but very invasive), the L4ka 
afterburning (theoritically close to as fast, but less invasive), and 
then of course the extremes like UML.

>>FWIW, Xen is already using QEMU in this way.  It would be very neat to 
>>see this technique applied to a Type II VMM.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Do you have any details on this?
>  
>
Mark did a really good job of summarizing the current architecture.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>>Regards,
>>
>>Anthony Liguori
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Qemu-devel mailing list
>>Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
>>http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>