From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Egger, Christoph" Subject: Re: Hypervisor Migration Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 16:32:16 +0200 Message-ID: <51E6AAF0.2040808@amazon.de> References: <51E69850.1070706@amazon.de> <51E6A14D.4070801@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: emdel Cc: George Dunlap , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 17.07.13 16:12, emdel wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:51 PM, George Dunlap > > wrote: > > Do you mean you want to migrate the guests from m.h to n.i.h? Or do > you mean you want to migrate the hypervisor itself from running on > bare metal to running in a VM? > > > The second situation, thus I want to migrate the hypervisor itself from > running on bare metal to running in a VM. I cannot imagine how this should work as the Xen hypervisor itself is what you boot on machine m. I can imagine that you launch a xen hypervisor as guest hypervisor on machine n and then migrate all guests from m to n.i. Christoph > > > I think the Intel guys have been looking at the first (migrating a > VM running on Xen-on-metal to Xen-on-Xen). Not sure about AMD. > > > I have Intel machines so I am interested in the Intel architecture. > Is the Intel work public? I would like to have a look. > I'm more interested in Xen-on-Xen even if Xen-on-metal is cool as well. > > > > I don't think anyone has tried the second even with a normal > operating system, much less a hypervisor with things running on top > of it. > > > Ok good to know. Maybe it's because the nested support was sperimental > and there are no useful application so far. > >