vkernel & GSoC, some questions
Kip Macy
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
> things.
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.
-Kip
More information about the freebsd-hackers
mailing list