[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] International Virtualization Conference
From: |
Rob Landley |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] International Virtualization Conference |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:48:33 -0400 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
On Monday 09 October 2006 8:08 am, Jim C. Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 12:05:02AM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > qemu is primarily a dynamic translator not a virtualizer.
> >
> > That's an implementation detail. The end result is running programs in a
> > virtual environment, and qemu's system emulation has lots of virtual
hardware
> > it attaches to virtual busses, which it performs virtual I/O to, even
> > simulating the delivery of virtual interrupts to signal completion of
virtual
> > DMA.
> >
> > Rob
> > --
> > Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
> >
>
> Here you are using the terms "virtual" and "emulated" interchangably. That's
> ok as long as the difference between virtualization and virtual/emulated is
> understood.
Well, the hardware people see a huge difference. To them one is "doing it in
hardware" and the other is "doing it in software".
I stay on the software side, and see them both as different ways to fake an
execution environment. Wine fakes a windows system, qemu can fake a
processor (and then either fake system calls for an app or fake hardware for
a kernel).
Considering that the original goal of QEMU was "to run the Wine project on
non-86 architectures" (see
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/tinycc-devel/2003-03/msg00084.html )
I think making a terminology distinction between Wine and QEMU is splitting
hairs. (And trying to draw a line between qemu, bochs, and valgrind is
splitting the result of that.)
> If I follow your logic, then bochs is also a good canidate for the workshop.
If you mean the way Hurd is a candidate for a workshop anywhere Linux is,
sure. If it's a purely academic conference where being useful doesn't enter
into it. (I followed Bochs and Plex86 5 years ago, but could never actually
get them to do anything useful despite repeated attempts. Still haven't,
although I see Bochs is back from the dead...)
> --
And I'm sorry, but I find your tagline actively wrong:
> Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty.
It begets "unmaintainable" after about 5 minutes.
> Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.
You've never been micro-managed, have you?
"Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when
there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Rob
--
"Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when
there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery