Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Pre-virtualization, was Re: linux/arch/xen/i386 or linux/arch/i386/xen - Ronald G. Minnich - com.xensource.lists.xen-devel

10 messages in com.xensource.lists.xen-develRe: [Xen-devel] Re: Pre-virtualizatio...

From	Sent On	Attachments
Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)	20 May 2005 09:47
Joshua LeVasseur	20 May 2005 09:57
aq	20 May 2005 10:23
Ronald G. Minnich	20 May 2005 10:55
Anthony Liguori	20 May 2005 11:32
aq	20 May 2005 11:46
Ronald G. Minnich	20 May 2005 12:25
Ronald G. Minnich	20 May 2005 12:49
Kamble, Nitin A	20 May 2005 13:59	.patch
Volkmar Uhlig	20 May 2005 15:32

Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Pre-virtualization, was Re: linux/arch/xen/i386 or linux/arch/i386/xen
From:	Ronald G. Minnich (rmin...@lanl.gov)
Date:	05/20/2005 12:25:40 PM
List:	com.xensource.lists.xen-devel

On Fri, 20 May 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:

I'd really like to see a "pure" form of pre-virtualization that required no modifications at all to the underlying source tree. Besides being interesting from an academic standpoint I think it would be highly useful for support legacy Open Source operating systems.

from my point of view, linux and bsd are the same OS; plan 9 is the hard one. I need to modify plan 9 for all of these. At the same time, if I understood how to hack the compiler in the manner you describe, it would probably not take long at all.

I'm very excited about this technology. I imagine that you can get all the benefits of binary-rewriting with less complexity and better performance (with the only limitation being that you have the source code for the OS which is fine by me).

likewise. It's a big effort to track Xen 3.0 nowadays, with the current rate of change, and the effort is highly magnified by the fact that Plan 9 does not use gcc.

ron