FreeBSD KVM port

[K. Macy]

As with any project in or out of svn, someone needs to take the time
to improve and maintain it. That has not happened in this instance.

-Kip

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Prateek Sharma <prateek3.14 at gmail.com> wrote:
> KVM has been around since 2007, so it's hardly new.
>
> Is there an equivalent hypervisor for FreeBSD ? AFAIK, even Xen Dom0
> is not possible (please correct me if i am wrong) . So the only option
> for virtualization available seems to be virtual-box.
>
> So FreeBSD has _just one_ hypervisor which works. And from my limited
> experience with it, i dont think it can be considered 'production
> grade'. And virtualbox does not come close to kvm/xen in terms of
> performance/management features . Also the whole Oracle thing ...
>
> I was curious about KVM support because of coming across the old port
> (2007). What happened to it ?
>
>
> 2011/6/30 K. Macy <kmacy at freebsd.org>:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Prateek Sharma <prateek3.14 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks for informing about BHyve.
>>>
>>> But KVM is feature-complete, and has been around for a long time as
>>> well. Also supports a large number of guests etc.
>
> vmware and xen are around for a long time. KVM is the new one in
> production context.
>
>>
>> And is GPL and dependent on Linux APIs. Any KVM port will
>> intrinsically be dependent on shimming to Linux APIs with all the
>> problems that that potentially entails.
>
> IMHO gpl  is not the main problem.  KVM is a linux kernel module that
> manage virtual contexts.
> It works with an io hypervisor (virtio) and and hardware emulator
> (qemu). So porting
> KVM to FreeBSD has no sense. The need is a tool to manage hardware contexts.
> This tool is  BHyve, I think.
>
> Let's have a look at what we currently get.
> - Qemu is working but does not support vt.
> - VirtualBox just works and support vt
> - Jails are becoming real containers
> - NetApp is working on a new hypervisor
> - A virtio driver should be soon available
> - Xen is supported has a domU
> - a set of useful features like cpuset, vnet, zfs, hast, rctl, geom
> are now available
>
> So what is missing ? Maybe an unified manager ala libvirt ? Some fs
> improvement like
> distribution, iscsi ? A bsd style cluster manager ? A lot of things
> are missing most of them are
> configuration  tools or stabilization, finalization of existing
> projects. But not an other
> hypervisor, I think.
>
> Cheers
> Joris
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:15 PM, K. Macy <kmacy at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> Courtesy of NetApp, FreeBSD has grown its own hypervisor "BHyve". I
>>>> don't have the initial commit at hand but it shouldn't be hard to
>>>> find. This is still a bit green, but is quite promising.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Prateek Sharma <prateek3.14 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>   I wanted to know the status of KVM (qemu-kvm) on FreeBSD. There
>>>>> seems to have been some work done earlier
>>>>> [http://retis.sssup.it/~fabio/freebsd/lkvm/] , but it seems quite old
>>>>> (2007) .
>>>>>
>>>>>    Is it possible to run KVM on freebsd, or is there some work
>>>>> already going into this ?
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> freebsd-virtualization at freebsd.org mailing list
>>>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-virtualization at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-virtualization at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>