From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1TX4-0003Lg-I6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:22:22 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1TX2-0003LT-My for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:22:21 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55219 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L1TX2-0003LQ-IL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:22:20 -0500 Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de ([217.72.192.221]:51958) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L1TX2-00050O-3a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:22:20 -0500 Received: from smtp06.web.de (fmsmtp06.dlan.cinetic.de [172.20.5.172]) by fmmailgate01.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD10F99B1AE for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:22:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from [88.64.19.159] (helo=[192.168.1.198]) by smtp06.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (WEB.DE 4.109 #226) id 1L1TWy-0001Om-00 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:22:16 +0100 Message-ID: <491F4B67.3000106@web.de> Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:21:27 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <200811141415.51702.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigFB2687587391340559138266" Sender: jan.kiszka@web.de Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Status on ARM host cpu Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigFB2687587391340559138266 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Steffen Liebergeld wrote: > Hi Paul, >=20 > 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 k= qemu >>> 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. >=20 >> However I advise using KVM and not kqemu. KVM has already been merged = to=20 >> upstream kernels, and the chances of getting another hypervisor interf= ace=20 >> merged are approximately zero. >=20 > KVM is not an option for me (and is not available for the ARM-platform)= =2E (...so is KQEMU) > I plan to port kqemu for the ARM-platform. Do have any estimates, for h= ow 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 --------------enigFB2687587391340559138266 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkfS24ACgkQniDOoMHTA+m/TwCeMoVToIh7g1EcFb0kukXDCkfI Zz0AnjBKMHCxXEgWfKPX6tKZOsBnEKcP =LHMA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigFB2687587391340559138266--