vkernel & GSoC, some questions
kip.macy at gmail.com
Mon Mar 17 03:37:48 UTC 2008
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 16/03/2008, Robert Watson <rwatson at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > Another avenue to consider is the Linux KVM virtualization technology, which
> > is seeing a high level of interest in the Linux community and sounds
> > increasingly mature and well-exercised. It would also offer interesting
> > migration benefits for Linux users wanting to try FreeBSD, allowing them to
> > trivially create new FreeBSD installs under their existing Linux install. We
> > had an SoC project last year but I'm not sure what the outcome was; it would
> > be useful to give Fabio a ping and see how things are going. Obviously,
> > anyone doing this project would need to manage the license issues involved
> > carefully.
> Wasn't part of the original KVM idea to support a "hypervisor"
> interface to a parent, sort of Xen-like, providing interrupt, VM and
> inter-VM "IPC" hooks?
> I remember seeing this stuff a while back but for some reason all I
> read about KVM - outside of what Redhat are doing with it and Xen now
> - focuses on hardware virtualisation.
> A BSD-licenced KVM hypervisor + FreeBSD kernel might be an interesting
> project. I'm pretty sure Rusty wrote a very very lightweight KVM
> hypervisor as a demonstration which may serve as a starting point for
Nope. It is called lguest, is GPL, IBM has the rights to it and has no
interest in changing the license.
Using KVM for architectural ideas while starting from a fresh codebase
is really the only way to go if you are concerned with licensing.
More information about the freebsd-hackers