From: Earlence F. <ear...@gm...> - 2013-04-30 16:12:51
|
The book (2004) states that work was going on for hardware assisted virt. Has there been progress on it? Where do I find information on it? The UML source tree still comes with the original modes of operation. -Earlence |
From: richard -r. w. <ric...@gm...> - 2013-04-30 16:17:10
|
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Earlence Fernandes <ear...@gm...> wrote: > The book (2004) states that work was going on for hardware assisted virt. I don't think so. > Has there been progress on it? Where do I find information on it? > The UML source tree still comes with the original modes of operation. UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. -- Thanks, //richard |
From: Earlence F. <ear...@gm...> - 2013-04-30 16:22:30
|
>UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. so you mean to say that KVM is preferable to UML? (I Guess it may depend on the situation?) -Earlence On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:17 PM, richard -rw- weinberger < ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Earlence Fernandes > <ear...@gm...> wrote: > > The book (2004) states that work was going on for hardware assisted virt. > > I don't think so. > > > Has there been progress on it? Where do I find information on it? > > The UML source tree still comes with the original modes of operation. > > UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. > > -- > Thanks, > //richard > |
From: Earlence F. <ear...@gm...> - 2013-04-30 16:50:07
|
But then there's a fundamental question of whether KVM has similar semantics. UML was incredibly useful to my project since it ran a whole "kernel + processes" in user space. Now i'm confused as to whether I need to change my work so that it works with KVM (I'm trying to read thru KVM docs to understand the semantics). Basically, my project involved redirecting the system calls of one process to the UML kernel. On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Richard RW. Weinberger < ri...@si...> wrote: > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > > > > UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. > > > > > > so you mean to say that KVM is preferable to UML? > > (I Guess it may depend on the situation?) > > KVM is *much* faster than UML and *much* less hacky. :-) > > Thanks, > //richard > |
From: richard -r. w. <ric...@gm...> - 2013-04-30 17:03:58
|
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Earlence Fernandes <ear...@gm...> wrote: > But then there's a fundamental question of whether KVM has similar > semantics. KVM works completely different than UML does. > UML was incredibly useful to my project since it ran a whole "kernel + > processes" in user space. > Now i'm confused as to whether I need to change my work so that it works > with KVM (I'm trying to read thru KVM docs to understand the semantics). You can still use UML, it is functional. -- Thanks, //richard |
From: Richard R. W. <ri...@si...> - 2013-04-30 17:24:04
|
----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. > > > so you mean to say that KVM is preferable to UML? > (I Guess it may depend on the situation?) KVM is *much* faster than UML and *much* less hacky. :-) Thanks, //richard |
From: Terry H. <ter...@gm...> - 2013-05-01 17:55:32
|
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Richard RW. Weinberger < ri...@si...> wrote: > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > > > > UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM. > > > > > > so you mean to say that KVM is preferable to UML? > > (I Guess it may depend on the situation?) > > KVM is *much* faster than UML and *much* less hacky. :-) > > Indeed, I am developing some functions for the virtual memory subsystem in the kernel. Qemu replaces UML in my case. I run qemu without kvm support because I don't seem to be able to run nested virtualization in virtualbox. Anyway now Qemu serves me well. :) Is Jeff Dike still developing UML? > Thanks, > //richard > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET > Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. > Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead > Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 > _______________________________________________ > User-mode-linux-devel mailing list > Use...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel > |
From: richard -r. w. <ric...@gm...> - 2013-05-01 18:15:57
|
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Terry Hsu <ter...@gm...> wrote: > Indeed, I am developing some functions for the virtual memory subsystem in > the kernel. > Qemu replaces UML in my case. I run qemu without kvm support because I don't > seem to be able to run nested virtualization in virtualbox. > Anyway now Qemu serves me well. :) > > Is Jeff Dike still developing UML? Not really. Just use git to find out. :) Currently I maintain UML in my very limited spare time. Al Viro also often helps hunting bugs down. So, don't expect much new features coming to UML. But I try hard to keep it running. -- Thanks, //richard |
From: Terry H. <ter...@gm...> - 2013-05-01 18:23:54
|
Great to know this, thanks for keeping it up! On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:15 PM, richard -rw- weinberger < ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Terry Hsu <ter...@gm...> wrote: > > Indeed, I am developing some functions for the virtual memory subsystem > in > > the kernel. > > Qemu replaces UML in my case. I run qemu without kvm support because I > don't > > seem to be able to run nested virtualization in virtualbox. > > Anyway now Qemu serves me well. :) > > > > Is Jeff Dike still developing UML? > > Not really. Just use git to find out. :) > > Currently I maintain UML in my very limited spare time. > Al Viro also often helps hunting bugs down. > > So, don't expect much new features coming to UML. > But I try hard to keep it running. > > -- > Thanks, > //richard > |