Thanks for your advice. I'm now preparing to update the Qemu for Windows (not started yet). I originally though it should be better to use Qemu-KVM in Linux because, for example, Qemu-KVM supports SMP guests. I will review the newest Qemu version before updating Qemu for Linux.
Regards, Xiaodong 2010/1/21 Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de>: > > On 21.01.2010, at 15:19, Xiaodong Yi wrote: > >> Luvalley is a lightweight type-1 Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM). >> Its part of source codes are derived from KVM to virtualize >> CPU instructions and memory management unit (MMU). However, its >> overall architecture is completely different from KVM, but somewhat >> like Xen. Luvalley runs outside of Linux, just like Xen's architecture. >> Any operating system, including Linux, could be used as >> Luvalley's scheduler, memory manager, physical device driver provider >> and virtual IO device >> emulator. Currently, Luvalley supports Linux and Windows. That is to >> say, one may run Luvalley to boot a Linux or Windows, and then run >> multiple virtualized operating systems on such Linux or Windows. >> >> From the point of view of Qemu, Luvalley enables Qemu to utilize the >> Intel's VT extension to gain much better performance. >> >> If you are interested in Luvalley project, you may download the source >> codes as well as the whitepaper from >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/luvalley/ >> >> The main changes of this release (Luvalley-5) are: >> >> * The code derived is updated from KVM-83 to KVM-88 > > It might be a better idea to use upstream kernel sources as basis. The KVM > snapshots are rather deprecated FWIW. > > Is the code to leverage Luvally vastly different from the accessors for KVM? > Maybe it'd be enough to have a wrapper for kvm_ioctl() that sends ioctls off > to Luvally instead of KVM to make the existing infrastructure work. That way > upstream support should be a no-brainer and you get all the upstream qemu > work for free. > > Also, this would finally make the windows builds more useful again. > > Alex
