WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Questioning the Xen Design of the VMM

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-devel] Questioning the Xen Design of the VMM
From: Al Boldi <a1426z@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 18:01:23 +0300
Delivery-date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:03:12 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.5
Greetings!

The Xen project caught my attention on LKML discussing hypervisors, so I took 
a look at Xen and read the README, where it says:

        This install tree contains source for a Linux 2.6 guest

This immediately turned me off, as I hoped Xen would be a bit more 
transparent, by simply exposing native hw tunneled thru some multiplexed Xen 
patched host-kernel driver.

I maybe missing something, but why should the Xen-design require the guest to 
be patched?


Thanks!

--
Al


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel