On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Mircea Gherzan wrote: > "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > is one of those virtualization extensions noticeably superior to the > > other? > > SVM is a bit superior by providing real mode support. The lack of > real mode emulation in the early verions of KVM was quite an issue > for users of VTx. thanks. just FYI, here's the system i'm thinking of getting to support my adventures into virtualization: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=4006371&sku=S445-M1626&srkey=m-1626 note the AMD Turion 64 X2 dual core TL-60 CPU which, based on everything i've read, like here: http://www.chiplist.com/ChipList2/chiplist_display_section.php?id=2231&page_number=&chiplist_version_major=&chiplist_version_minor=&chiplist_version_revision=&chiplist_version_extension=&chiplist_version_release_date=&chapter_number=0§ion_number=0&subsection_number=0¶graph_number=0&view_mode=tree2a&expansion=2 gives me full (AMD-based) hardware virtualization extensions for KVM. does anyone have any reason to believe i might be misreading something and making a mistake with that setup with respect to virtualization? quite simply, i want a moderately-powered laptop that will support all variations of virtualization i might want to play with. thanks again. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry: Have classroom, will lecture. http://crashcourse.ca Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA ======================================================================== -- To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
