Keith Bierman wrote: > On May 30, 2008, at 6:59 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > > >> The only drawback of the older Socket 940 Opterons is that they don't >> support the hardware VT extensions, so running a Windows guest >> under xVM >> on them isn't currently possible. >> > > > > From the VirtualBox manual, page 11 > > • No hardware virtualization required. VirtualBox does not require > processor > features built into newer hardware like VT-x (on Intel processors) or > AMD-V > (on AMD processors). As opposed to many other virtualization > solutions, you > can therefore use VirtualBox even on older hardware where these > features are > not present. In fact, VirtualBox’s sophisticated software techniques > are typically > faster than hardware virtualization, although it is still possible to > enable hard- > ware virtualization on a per-VM basis. Only for some exotic guest > operating > systems like OS/2, hardware virtualization is required. > > > ---- > > I've been running windows under OpenSolaris on an aged 32-bit Dell. > I'm morally certain it lacks the hardware support, and in any event, > the VBOX configuration is set to avoid using the VT extensions anyway. > > Runs fine. Not the fastest box on the planet ... but it's got limited > DRAM. > >
That is correct. VirtualBox does _not_ require the VT extensions. I was referring to xVM, which I'm still taking as synonymous with the Xen-based system. xVM _does_ require the VT hardware extensions to run guest OSes in an unmodified form, which currently includes all flavors of Windows. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
