This is a discussion on Re: kernel level virtualisation requirements. - FreeBSD ; > From: Ivan Voras > Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2007 12:54:21AM +0200 > > Andrea Campi wrote: > > > In para-virtualization you modify the kernel source in such a way that [...] > > Well Xen does paravirtulization like ...
> From: Ivan Voras
> Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2007 12:54:21AM +0200
> Andrea Campi wrote:
> > In para-virtualization you modify the kernel source in such a way that
> Well Xen does paravirtulization like you described (and I agree
> something like that is more flexible then jails, if supported by other
> operating systems). DragonflyBSD has its own flavor of virtualization
> similar to user mode Linux, but it has greatly diverged from FreeBSD so
> it't probably not trivially portable.
> Or do you mean something like this:
> http://feanor.sssup.it/~fabio/freebsd/lkvm/ ?
The version of kvm ported to FreeBSD has no paravirtualization
support. Paravirtualization is, as far as I know, still an
experimental feature on Linux, not present in the mainline tree.
I am not aware of FreeBSD support for the kvm hypercalls that are
being introduced in the kvm experimental trees.
By now kvm is really just a full virtualization solution.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "email@example.com"