| 1 |
Den 26. sep. 2015 14:00, skrev J. Roeleveld: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
>> Depending on your hardware you will want to use hvm or pvm for |
| 4 |
>> efficiency. (VT-x means hvm is more efficient). |
| 5 |
> What do you base this on? |
| 6 |
> Without VT-x, HVM doesn't even work, which means PV is only option. |
| 7 |
I stand corrected :/ . |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I'l refrain from confusing the issue further, I believe I was thinking |
| 10 |
VT-d. This |
| 11 |
<http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Project_Software_Overview#Guest_Types> is |
| 12 |
the right place to learn about guest types :). Some of the alphabet-soup |
| 13 |
is explained here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The rule of thumb I live by for my private, ad-hoc systems is: since I |
| 16 |
have hardware support for virtualization and also VT-d, I use it, and I |
| 17 |
keep references handy while i configure things :-D. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> With VT-x, PV still has higher performance as the drivers inside the guest |
| 21 |
> talk directly to the host. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
PV on HVM will be best of both worlds, and drivers are available at |
| 25 |
least for windows and linux, so I was taking pv drivers as a given. |
| 26 |
Also, where I said VT-x read VT-d. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
>> If running hvm on |
| 29 |
>> quemu-xen-traditional, you HAVE to use a bootloader inside the VM, or |
| 30 |
>> some kind of netboot/pvgrub thing. If running upstream quemu for a hvm, |
| 31 |
>> you can choose. I find it less of a hassle to use bootloader inside the |
| 32 |
>> VM. |
| 33 |
> It's simple, if you don't have full access to the host. |
| 34 |
> If you have full access, it's actually simpler as you don't have to worry |
| 35 |
> about boot-order, partitioning and a bootloader. |
| 36 |
I'm sure you are right, it is just pvgrub is an extra piece of kit I |
| 37 |
haven't bothered learning. I'll go back to lurking now :-~ |
Archives