On 10/3/2008 5:35:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> >
> > What's the significance of supporting multiple interfaces to the
> > same guest simultaneously, i.e. _runtime_? We don't want the guests
> > to run on such a literarily Frankenstein machine. And practically,
> > such testing/debugging would be good only for Halloween :-).
> >
>
> By that notion, EVERY CPU currently shipped is a "Frankenstein" CPU,
> since at very least they export Intel-derived and AMD-derived interfaces.
> This is in other words, a ridiculous claim.
The big difference here is that you could create a VM at runtime (by combining the existing interfaces) that did not exist before (or was not tested before). For example, a hypervisor could show hyper-v, osx-v (if any), linux-v, etc., and a guest could create a VM with hyper-v MMU, osx-v interrupt handling, Linux-v timer, etc. And such combinations/variations can grow exponentially.
Or are you suggesting that multiple interfaces be _available_ to guests at runtime but the guest chooses one of them?
> -hpa
>
.
Jun Nakajima | Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
