From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-05-03 20:06:10
|
UML is now able to run nested inside itself. This works as of UML 2.4.18-21, which isn't released yet, but will be soon. See the log below for the gory details, and also see http://user-mode-linux.sf.net/nesting.html for how to do it yourself. This is a sign of UML maturity rather than any new magic functionality having been added. UML is a demanding process, so even though it uses only the Linux system call interface, it takes some maturity for a Linux kernel to host it. The missing pieces were a couple of signal delivery bugs that were still lurking. Once these were fixed, UML booted right up. Jeff Here's the log of the first nested boot. Notes: 'usermode:~#' is the UML shell prompt. /dev/ubd/1 has been attached to a tomsrtbt image on the host ~/linux/2.4/nest/linux is the specially build nested UML. Also note the back-to-back UML shutdowns at the very end. usermode:~# scp jdike@192.168.0.254:linux/2.4/nest/linux . jdike@192.168.0.254's password: scp: warning: Executing scp1 compatibility. linux 100% |*****************************| 8227 KB 00:00 ETA usermode:~# ls -l linux -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 8424800 May 3 21:09 linux usermode:~# ./linux ubd0=/dev/ubd/1 tracing thread pid = 146 Linux version 2.4.18-21um (jd...@um...) (gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-81)) #1 Wed May 1 21:07:32 EDT 2002 On node 0 totalpages: 8192 zone(0): 0 pages. zone(1): 8192 pages. zone(2): 0 pages. Kernel command line: ubd0=/dev/ubd/1 root=/dev/ubd0 Calibrating delay loop... 707.26 BogoMIPS Memory: 32244k available Dentry-cache hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes) Inode-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 2, 16384 bytes) Mount-cache hash table entries: 512 (order: 0, 4096 bytes) Buffer-cache hash table entries: 1024 (order: 0, 4096 bytes) Page-cache hash table entries: 8192 (order: 3, 32768 bytes) Checking for host processor cmov support...Reading /proc/cpuinfo failed, errno = 2 Yes Checking for host processor xmm support...Reading /proc/cpuinfo failed, errno = 2 No Checking that ptrace can change system call numbers...OK Checking that host ptys support output SIGIO...No, enabling workaround POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX Linux NET4.0 for Linux 2.4 Based upon Swansea University Computer Society NET3.039 Initializing RT netlink socket Starting kswapd VFS: Diskquotas version dquot_6.4.0 initialized devfs: v1.10 (20020120) Richard Gooch (rg...@at...) devfs: boot_options: 0x1 JFFS version 1.0, (C) 1999, 2000 Axis Communications AB JFFS2 version 2.1. (C) 2001 Red Hat, Inc., designed by Axis Communications AB. pty: 256 Unix98 ptys configured block: 64 slots per queue, batch=16 RAMDISK driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 4096K size 1024 blocksize SLIP: version 0.8.4-NET3.019-NEWTTY (dynamic channels, max=256). loop: loaded (max 8 devices) PPP generic driver version 2.4.1 Universal TUN/TAP device driver 1.4 (C)1999-2001 Maxim Krasnyansky NET4: Linux TCP/IP 1.0 for NET4.0 IP Protocols: ICMP, UDP, TCP IP: routing cache hash table of 512 buckets, 4Kbytes TCP: Hash tables configured (established 2048 bind 2048) NET4: Unix domain sockets 1.0/SMP for Linux NET4.0. Initializing stdio console driver Initializing software serial port version 1 mconsole (version 1) initialized on /root/.uml/yfWc2E/mconsole Partition check: ubda: unknown partition table UML Audio Relay: May 1 2002 21:17:10 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem) readonly. Mounted devfs on /dev INIT: version 2.84 booting EXT2-fs warning: mounting unchecked fs, running e2fsck is recommended INIT: Entering runlevel: 5 Welcome to the uml version of Tom's root/boot. This is a customized version, so the notice below is displayed at Tom's request. ******************************************************************************* * If you base something on it, use any of the scripts, distribute binaries or * * libraries from it, or distribute customized versions of it: You must credit * * tomsrtbt and include a pointer to http://www.toms.net/rb/ and to...@to..., * * and include this notice verbatim. Copyright Tom Oehser 1999. This notice in * * no way supercedes or nullifies any other protections on the component parts * * such as the BSD and GPL copyrights which apply to practically everything!!! * * Within these strictures you may redistribute, incorporate, copy, modify, or * * do anything else to it or with it that you like. Tomsrtbt has no warranties * * not even implied fitness or usefulness. If it breaks you keep both pieces. * ******************************************************************************* What you have is... 3c589_cs advansys agetty aha152x aha152x_cs aha1542 aic7xxx ash awk badblocks bdflush buildit.s busLogic busybox bzip2 cardbus cardmgr cat ce ce.help chain.b chattr chgrp chmod chown chroot clear clone.s cmp common config cp cpio cut date dd ddate debugfs df dhcpcd dirname dmesg ds du dumpe2fs e2fsck eata echo echo.c elvis emacs ex extend false fdflush fdformat fdisk fdomain filesize find findsuper fmt fsck.ext2 fsck.msdos fstab grep group gzip halt head hexdump hexedit host.conf hostname hosts i82365 ifconfig ifport ile image init init.old inittab insmod install.s ioctl.save issue kill killall5 ksyms ld ld-linux length less libc libcom_err libe2p libext2fs libss libtermcap libuuid lilo lilo.conf ln loadkeys login losetup ls lsattr man mawk md5sum memtest miterm mkdir mkdosfs mke2fs mkfifo mkfs.minix mklost+found mknod mkswap mnsed more more.help mount mt mtab mv nc ncr53c8xx network networks nmclan_cs ntfs passwd pax pcmcia pcmcia_core pcnet_cs ping plip ppa printf profile protocols ps pwd qlogic_cs qlogicfas rc.0 rc.6 rc.M rc.S rc.custom rc.custom.gz rc.custom~ reboot rescuept reset resolv.conf rm rmdir rmmod route rsh rshd script scsi scsi_info seagate sed serial serial_cs services setserial settings.s sh shared shutdown slattach sleep snarf sort split stty swapoff swapon sync tail tar tcic tee telnet telnetd termcap test tomcr.txt tomshexd tomsrtbt.FAQ touch true tune2fs umount undeb undeb-- unpack.s unrpm-- update utmp vi vi.help view wc wtmplock ...Login as root. ttys/0 tomsrtbt login: root Password: ile rev.2.01 Today is Pungenday, the 50th day of Discord in the YOLD 3168 Celebrate Discoflux # ps uax 1 S (init) init 2 S (keventd) 3 S (ksoftirqd_CPU0) 4 S (kswapd) 5 S (bdflush) 6 S (kupdated) 7 S (mtdblockd) 55 S (ile) ile /bin/sh -c . /etc/profile -si 59 S (sh) /bin/sh -c . /etc/profile -si 61 S (ps) /bin/sh /usr/bin/ps uax 62 R (ps) /bin/sh /usr/bin/ps uax 63 R (sed) sed -e s/\ / /g # halt INIT: Switching to runlevel: 0 INIT: Sending processes the TERM signal halt System halted. nbd: module cleaned up. usermode:~# halt Broadcast message from root (vc/0) Fri May 3 21:24:09 2002... The system is going down for system halt NOW !! INIT: Switching to runlevel: 0 INIT: Sending processes the TERM signal INIT: Sending processes the KILL signal Stopping internet superserver: inetd. Stopping OpenBSD Secure Shell server: sshd. Saving the System Clock time to the Hardware Clock... hwclock: Can't open /dev/tty1, errno=2: No such file or directory. hwclock is unable to get I/O port access: the iopl(3) call failed. Hardware Clock updated to Fri May 3 21:25:17 CEST 2002. Stopping portmap daemon: portmap. Stopping NFS kernel daemon: mountd nfsd. Unexporting directories for NFS kernel daemon...done. Stopping NFS common utilities: statd. Stopping system log daemon: klogd syslogd. Sending all processes the TERM signal... done. Sending all processes the KILL signal... done. Saving random seed... done. Unmounting remote filesystems... done. Deconfiguring network interfaces: done. Deactivating swap... done. Unmounting local filesystems... done. * route del -host 192.168.0.253 dev tap0 * bash -c echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/tap0/proxy_arp * arp -i eth0 -d 192.168.0.253 pub Power down. nbd: module cleaned up. um 1012: |
From: Roger B. <ro...@ro...> - 2002-05-03 20:20:25
|
> This works as of UML 2.4.18-21, > which isn't released yet, but will be soon. Will one built with NESTING=1 work outside of UML? BTW I have seen some flakiness with -21. For example when RPM was doing installations, very infrequently it would fail to open the database. This is entirely non-repeatable, but NEVER happens with -15. I also got this once: Initializing software serial port version 1 mconsole (version 1) initialized on /home/rogerb/.uml/mdk82/mconsole Partition check: ubda:sleeping process 8391 got unexpected signal : 17 (17 is SIGCHLD). Roger |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-05-03 23:04:40
|
Some moron who can't keep track of his own patches said: > This works as of UML 2.4.18-21, which isn't released yet, but will be > soon. Correction - 2.4.18-22, which has just been released. Jeff |
From: Guest s. DW <dw...@wi...> - 2002-05-03 21:51:11
|
Congratulations! [Reminds me of the good old times 30 years ago - had a tower of three virtual machines on top of a real PDP 8/I. Now that you can run UML under UML, can you run UML under UML under UML?] |
From: Gerrit H. <gh...@us...> - 2002-05-03 22:28:16
|
In message <200...@wi...>, > : Guest section DW writes: > Congratulations! > > [Reminds me of the good old times 30 years ago - > had a tower of three virtual machines on top of a > real PDP 8/I. Now that you can run UML under UML, > can you run UML under UML under UML?] Fun stuff! With PTX we were doing something very similar near the end of our days with PTX: PTX could run Linux Binaries PTX could run a System 390 emulator (Flex/ES ?) PTX could *almost* run VMWare (might be able to run Win4Lin or Boochs...) PTX could sever as a Citrix (Windows NT) server Picture Windows running in VMWare, talking to an OS/390 emulator on the same hardware. You might have been able to run Linux on 390, as well as VM/SP or whatever... Add on all the other Linux emulators and you had quite a few applications you could run on a single platform, all able to talk to each other. ;-) Customers wanted to run legacy OS/390 apps that they had lost the binaries for, with a fast, modern database (Oracle or DB2) running at native speed, with either Linux or Windows applications. Add UML and you can do development and client support like System 390 can do with Linux and you have an interesting (if a bit perverted ;-) world. Sick and twisted... gerrit |
From: Christoph H. <hc...@in...> - 2002-05-04 06:29:13
|
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 03:28:03PM -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > PTX could *almost* run VMWare (might be able to run Win4Lin or Boochs...) Umm, you have ported the VMWare and Win4Lin kernel modules? For Win4Lin I could almost image it as it is ported UnixWare code.. |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-05-04 00:30:13
|
dw...@wi... said: > Congratulations! Thanks! > Now that you can run UML > under UML, can you run UML under UML under UML?] Heh, I haven't tried it. Feel free, it should work now. gh...@us... said: > Customers wanted to run legacy OS/390 apps that they had lost the > binaries for, with a fast, modern database (Oracle or DB2) running at > native speed, with either Linux or Windows applications. Add UML and > you can do development and client support like System 390 can do with > Linux and you have an interesting (if a bit perverted ;-) world. Yup. And that sort of thing doesn't come close to reaching the potential of a virtual OS. A couple of the intermediate-term things I'm most interested in are embedding UML in things like Apache to provide a standard internal development and execution environment spreading a SMP UML instance across multiple hosts Jeff |
From: Mike F. <mf...@ma...> - 2002-05-05 08:25:19
|
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:32:27PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote: > A couple of the intermediate-term things I'm most interested in are > embedding UML in things like Apache to provide a standard internal > development and execution environment How would that benefit Apache, and why does is have any use for an imbedded kernel? > > spreading a SMP UML instance across multiple hosts How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? Any URLs you may have on this would be quite helpful. Mike |
From: Vikram <vv...@st...> - 2002-05-05 08:30:07
|
> > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? > > Any URLs you may have on this would be quite helpful. uh-huh, you miss the pt maybe? uml offers a great testing, debugging, developing platform. the whole idea is to replace the real thing (say like kernel devel) with UML and your qn is more like why cant we use the real thing itself....:) Vikram |
From: Mike F. <mf...@ma...> - 2002-05-05 08:42:47
|
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 01:29:43AM -0700, Vikram wrote: > > > > > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? > > > > Any URLs you may have on this would be quite helpful. > > uh-huh, you miss the pt maybe? uml offers a great testing, debugging, > developing platform. the whole idea is to replace the real thing (say like > kernel devel) with UML and your qn is more like why cant we use the real > thing itself....:) If you want to test clustering (or "UML SMP over several seperate hosts" -JDike) with UML, why not just create a UML kernel with the clustering support (ie, MOSIX) in that UML kernel? Really, I'm just asking what the benifit is to use UML for clustering as oposed to MOSIX. I can think of one, testing NUMA without special hardware... |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-05-05 11:23:12
|
mf...@ma... said: > How would that benefit Apache, and why does is have any use for an > imbedded kernel? See http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/slides/wvu2002/wvu2002.htm, which are the slides from a talk I gave at WVU and MorLUG in which I explained this more clearly than I had managed before. The section that's relevant here starts at http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/slides/wvu2002/img9.htm > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? MOSIX (or Compaq's SSI) would certainly be a way of doing it. It happens that there's a particularly simple way of doing it with UML. You'd partition UML's 'physical' memory between the hosts, and use the fact that those pages are really virtual to fault them between hosts as needed. This would perform particularly badly, but its simplicity appeals to me. Jeff |
From: Larry M. <lm...@bi...> - 2002-05-05 16:21:35
|
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 07:25:00AM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote: > mf...@ma... said: > > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? > > MOSIX (or Compaq's SSI) would certainly be a way of doing it. It happens > that there's a particularly simple way of doing it with UML. You'd partition > UML's 'physical' memory between the hosts, and use the fact that those pages > are really virtual to fault them between hosts as needed. This would perform > particularly badly, but its simplicity appeals to me. See http://www.bitmover.com/cc-pitch/ for some more on this idea. I think the UML approach would be very cool. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm |
From: Lars Marowsky-B. <lm...@su...> - 2002-05-06 16:14:54
|
On 2002-05-05T07:25:00, Jeff Dike <jd...@ka...> said: > MOSIX (or Compaq's SSI) would certainly be a way of doing it. It happens > that there's a particularly simple way of doing it with UML. You'd partition > UML's 'physical' memory between the hosts, and use the fact that those pages > are really virtual to fault them between hosts as needed. This would perform > particularly badly, but its simplicity appeals to me. An interesting and simple approach indeed; but spreading an instance across multiple nodes is nowhere as simple as it seems; where do you keep OS data, IO access, scheduling decisions, inter-node communication in the first place, how to deal with node failure etc... However, I believe it could potentially be implemented cleaner than currently with the Compaq SSI stuff, because the encapsulation is better etc; but I have been known to be wrong ;-) It would certainly be very interesting. If you _really_ want to open this can of worms, you should consider joining linux-cluster mailing list for this, or the Open Clustering Framework list (because you are going to stumble into the madness which is "interoperability and lack of standards" here). Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lm...@su...> -- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-05-06 19:54:12
|
lm...@su... said: > but spreading an instance across multiple nodes is nowhere as simple > as it seems; It is if you want to be sufficiently stupid about it :-) > where do you keep OS data, It gets faulted from host to host as needed. > IO access, This scheme (and any clustering scheme, I think) would need back channels for one node to access the devices of another > scheduling decisions, This machine thinks it's a normal SMP box, so scheduling happens as normal > inter-node communication in the first place, how to deal > with node failure etc... Maybe I'm not familiar enough with the clustering world, but I was under the impression that with a normal SSI cluster, the nodes are like CPUs in an SMP box - if one fails, the whole thing dies. In other words, that SSI clustering and HA clustering are pretty disjoint. Jeff |
From: Lars Marowsky-B. <lm...@su...> - 2002-05-07 16:26:55
|
On 2002-05-06T15:55:52, Jeff Dike <jd...@ka...> said: > > but spreading an instance across multiple nodes is nowhere as simple > > as it seems; > It is if you want to be sufficiently stupid about it :-) Ugh. > > where do you keep OS data, > It gets faulted from host to host as needed. Ugh Ugh Ugh. You need coherency algorithms for these. > > IO access, > This scheme (and any clustering scheme, I think) would need back channels > for one node to access the devices of another Right. You need communication services and coherency algorithms for these ;-) > > scheduling decisions, > This machine thinks it's a normal SMP box, so scheduling happens as normal Ugh ugh ugh. Too many page faults; you need a scheduler capable of keeping node affinity. > > inter-node communication in the first place, how to deal > > with node failure etc... > Maybe I'm not familiar enough with the clustering world, but I was under the > impression that with a normal SSI cluster, the nodes are like CPUs in an > SMP box - if one fails, the whole thing dies. In other words, that SSI > clustering and HA clustering are pretty disjoint. No. In the optimal case, nothing dies. ;-) In the less than optimal case, only the processes affected directly by the failure die (the processes which had dirty pages there etc). In the really useless case, the entire cluster goes down like on a SMP box or an unpartitioned CC-NUMA. "In search of clusters" is definetely highly recommended reading. It is very entertaining, too. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lm...@su...> -- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister |
From: Rob L. <la...@tr...> - 2002-05-07 19:27:33
|
On Tuesday 07 May 2002 12:26 pm, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > > This machine thinks it's a normal SMP box, so scheduling happens as > > normal > > Ugh ugh ugh. Too many page faults; you need a scheduler capable of keeping > node affinity. O(1)? Thought it did. Might have to teach the load balancer to be a bit more clever... Rob |
From: Subhachandra C. <sub...@ya...> - 2002-05-06 16:46:26
|
How about using UML to move the whole networking stack/apps to the user mode? UML already allows this but I think we can make it faster. Basically any user should be able to use UML and run his own servers/services on top of UML (http, ftp. firewalls etc). This would give each user the freedom to run any service and multiple users can run the same service on privileged ports. It should also improve security as a breakin into any of the servers will be restricted to that single user and not result in a "root exploit". This can help reduce the complexity in deploying servers providing lots of services. You can break up the services into multiple simple blocks and have an UMN/UML for each of them. This would make admin/deployment of each block lot simpler. The actual OS/Linux kernel runnning underneath the UMLs' can be used to provide only basic services like the "tuntap" or any other virtual/physical interfaces, securing logging services, VM protection etc. Changes to UML: The current implementation of UML has a performance overhead of maybe 2-3 times (correct me if I am wrong) if you run a service on top of it instead of on the base OS. This is probably because UML tries to replicate all the kernel functionaly exactly (UML now self-hosts) as a kernel would provide running on bare hardware. We might be able to come up with a dirty implementation of UML (UMN- User Mode Networking) where we could use a lot more of the underlying OS services and make networking faster. This will reduce the fuctionality of UML in certain areas (like cannot run all kinds of kernel modules) but make it very useful in networking apps. Maybe networking apps in the future can have UMN embedded into them. Is this possible? Subhachandra Chandra __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com |
From: Ivan P. <iv...@to...> - 2002-05-06 17:25:27
|
This reminds me of Nemesis OS and "vertically structured" protocol stacks. A lot of the papers written about Nemesis focus on how user-land networking stacks can improve QoS because resource usage is more accurately attributed to the right user (and counted as anonymous "system time"). As UML moves forward it's probably a good idea to review this and similar research. Ivan... On Mon, 6 May 2002, Subhachandra Chandra wrote: > How about using UML to move the whole networking > stack/apps to the user mode? UML already allows this > but I think we can make it faster. > > Basically any user should be able to use UML and run > his own servers/services on top of UML (http, ftp. > firewalls etc). This would give each user the freedom > to run any service and multiple users can run the same > service on privileged ports. It should also improve > security as a breakin into any of the servers will be > restricted to that single user and not result in a > "root exploit". This can help reduce the complexity in > deploying servers providing lots of services. You can > break up the services into multiple simple blocks and > have an UMN/UML for each of them. This would make > admin/deployment of each block lot simpler. > > The actual OS/Linux kernel runnning underneath the > UMLs' can be used to provide only basic services like > the "tuntap" or any other virtual/physical interfaces, > securing logging services, VM protection etc. > > Changes to UML: The current implementation of UML has > a performance overhead of maybe 2-3 times (correct me > if I am wrong) if you run a service on top of it > instead of on the base OS. This is probably because > UML tries to replicate all the kernel functionaly > exactly (UML now self-hosts) as a kernel would provide > running on bare hardware. > > We might be able to come up with a dirty > implementation of UML (UMN- User Mode Networking) > where we could use a lot more of the underlying OS > services and make networking faster. This will reduce > the fuctionality of UML in certain areas (like cannot > run all kinds of kernel modules) but make it very > useful in networking apps. Maybe networking apps in > the future can have UMN embedded into them. Is this > possible? > > > > Subhachandra Chandra > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > http://health.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... > _______________________________________________ > User-mode-linux-devel mailing list > Use...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel > |
From: Ivan P. <iv...@to...> - 2002-05-06 17:30:09
|
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Ivan Pulleyn wrote: > > This reminds me of Nemesis OS and "vertically structured" protocol > stacks. A lot of the papers written about Nemesis focus on how > user-land networking stacks can improve QoS because resource usage is > more accurately attributed to the right user (and counted as anonymous ^^^^^^^ ... should say "NOT counted" ... > "system time"). As UML moves forward it's probably a good idea to > review this and similar research. |
From: Subhachandra C. <sub...@ya...> - 2002-05-06 17:41:06
|
You can also tune your TCP/IP stack based on the application needs. Depending on whether your traffic is a lot of short flows or long flows, the TCP window size etc can be tuned. --- Ivan Pulleyn <iv...@to...> wrote: > > This reminds me of Nemesis OS and "vertically > structured" protocol > stacks. A lot of the papers written about Nemesis > focus on how > user-land networking stacks can improve QoS because > resource usage is > more accurately attributed to the right user (and > counted as anonymous > "system time"). As UML moves forward it's probably a > good idea to > review this and similar research. > > Ivan... > > > On Mon, 6 May 2002, Subhachandra Chandra wrote: > > > How about using UML to move the whole networking > > stack/apps to the user mode? UML already allows > this > > but I think we can make it faster. > > > > Basically any user should be able to use UML and > run > > his own servers/services on top of UML (http, ftp. > > firewalls etc). This would give each user the > freedom > > to run any service and multiple users can run the > same > > service on privileged ports. It should also > improve > > security as a breakin into any of the servers will > be > > restricted to that single user and not result in a > > "root exploit". This can help reduce the > complexity in > > deploying servers providing lots of services. You > can > > break up the services into multiple simple blocks > and > > have an UMN/UML for each of them. This would make > > admin/deployment of each block lot simpler. > > > > The actual OS/Linux kernel runnning underneath the > > UMLs' can be used to provide only basic services > like > > the "tuntap" or any other virtual/physical > interfaces, > > securing logging services, VM protection etc. > > > > Changes to UML: The current implementation of UML > has > > a performance overhead of maybe 2-3 times (correct > me > > if I am wrong) if you run a service on top of it > > instead of on the base OS. This is probably > because > > UML tries to replicate all the kernel functionaly > > exactly (UML now self-hosts) as a kernel would > provide > > running on bare hardware. > > > > We might be able to come up with a dirty > > implementation of UML (UMN- User Mode Networking) > > where we could use a lot more of the underlying OS > > services and make networking faster. This will > reduce > > the fuctionality of UML in certain areas (like > cannot > > run all kinds of kernel modules) but make it very > > useful in networking apps. Maybe networking apps > in > > the future can have UMN embedded into them. Is > this > > possible? > > > > > > > > Subhachandra Chandra > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > > http://health.yahoo.com > > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for > download mirrors. We supply > > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: > ban...@so... > > _______________________________________________ > > User-mode-linux-devel mailing list > > Use...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com |
From: Pavel M. <pa...@su...> - 2002-05-06 09:49:57
|
Hi! > Yup. And that sort of thing doesn't come close to reaching the potential > of a virtual OS. > > A couple of the intermediate-term things I'm most interested in are > embedding UML in things like Apache to provide a standard internal > development and execution environment This is little perverted, right? What is it good for? > spreading a SMP UML instance across multiple hosts Now this looks very interesting to me. Pavel -- Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt, details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html. |