|
From: | Avi Kivity |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu? |
Date: | Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:59:30 +0300 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) |
Jamie Lokier wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:You might have realized from the available answers that not everybody is lucky enough to be able to afford 2 week old hardware, and therefore not everybody is able to use kvm.Yeah I don't either. I actually thought kvm had replaced it effectively.Plus kvm's not suitable for some guests. I'm thinking old Windows guests with 16-bit kernel code here.
kvm on amd will run these perfectly.
It has come up before that kvm will eventually support 16-bit code better, although I got the impression that it would never support full 16-bit virtualisation accurately, so e.g. Windows 95 will not run on it, nor some other partially 16-bit OSes. Possibly not even very old versions of Linux, I'm not sure. Don't ask me _why_ I want to run them. :-) Just a data point that it's not just about the host hardware, and as far as I know kqemu can accelerate them.
It falls back to qemu for 16-bit code. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |