Re: [PATCH 0/5] KVM paravirt_ops implementation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Zachary Amsden wrote:
You only need to quiesce if you have guest-visible data-structures that have details about the underlying hardware. So Xen needs to quiesce, but I don't know of any other VMM that would.

VMI, KVM and lhype should be capable of transparent migration without guest involvement.

Sure; Xen makes the explicit design decision that suspend/resume/migrate are things that the guest is likely to want to have some involvement in if its already doing all the paravirt games. A semi-kinda-paravirtualized hvm Xen guest doesn't have to worry too much about those kinds of things.

   J
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux