There are a few notable virtualized solutions available to host virtual machines. For example, VMWare Workstation, vSphere ESXi and Virtual Box.
Please suggest which one of these to use for creating a freeBSD MIPS virtual machine?
Also, provide any specific h/w requirement for the host running the virtualized solution mentioned above to support MIPS.
Just wanted to share the answer I got from another channel. May it could help others. Quoting from the link "https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/4o8cyc/which_vm_solution_and_hw_to_use_for_creating_a/"
"VMWare and Virtual Box don't run on MIPS or emulate MIPS so that's not even an option.
If you want to run this on x86 and emulate MIPS you can use QEMU or GXemul. There are others but those are probably the most popular/supported. If you had a MIPS machine I'm guessing you wouldn't be asking this question."
I want to test Linux KVM functionality. So to test, Instead of creating the Linux KVM (Hypervisor), I want to setup the emulator for that, which reduces the cost of hardware/resources.
Please let me know if is there any way to create emulator for Linux KVM ?
As you are looking for the emulation then BOCHS is your choice. One of the KVM's requirements is the Virtualization support by the host CPU.
According to the chip support list it emulates AMD Phenom X3 8650 among other AMD and Intel models. The real AMD Phenom X3 8650 does support AMD-V technology. However, I can't tell you to what extent the implementation is complete. Anyway, you could try all emulated AMD models that supports AMD-V and Intel models that supports VT-x and see what happens.
However, do not expect it to be sufficiently fast as you are going to run KVM guest inside KVM host running inside BOCHS emulator.
I've heared that hosted VMs make I/O virtualization easier. Because no device driver is needed for the VM and it can use the host OS device drivers for devices. My question is if the device driver is installed on the guest OS why do we need to use device drivers of the host OS?
Thanks in advance! :D
Depending of your virtualization solution some devices of the virtual machine are virtual (for example, hard disk) while other not (for example processor), for the virtualizated devices, they're generic enought so they may not need drivers (but VM tools contains drivers that make them perform better), but at the end Virtual Machines are running on top of the host operating system, so this operating system, need to have drivers for all the real hardware, to be able to provide that hardware to the virtual machine.
I'm looking for to compile a minimal linux 3.5 kernel for Hyper-V.
The "selecting" hyper-v drivers part is quite easy. However, how to remove unnecessary modules/drivers and improve performance.
Read Linux Kernel in a Nutshell by Greg Kroah
http://www.kroah.com/lkn/
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
What VM technologies exist for Linux, their pros and cons, and which is recommended for which application?
Since this kind of question can be asked for X other than "VM technologies for Linux", and since the answer changes with progress, I suggest to define a template for this kind of pages. Those pages will have the tag 'stateoftheart' and they will be revisited each month and each month there will be up-to-date list of technologies, up-to-date reviews and up-to-date recommendations.
This is a job for ... Wikipedia!
Types of Virtualization
Platform Virtualization
Comparison of Virtual Machines
Now that the obvious stuff is out of the way...
Linux runs fine as a guest on every VM host I've used, so I'm going to assume that you're referring to Linux as the host operating system. I'm also going to assume x86 or amd64 hardware.
Platform virtualization breaks down into two major forms: Desktop virtualization and Server virtualization. Both types will allow you to load and run multiple OS instances as guests that virtualize their I/O through the host OS. Desktop virtualization concentrates on providing a highly interactive console experience for each of the guest VMs, while Server virtualization concentrates on maximizing computing performance, generally while sacrificing console services and more exotic devices (Sound cards, USB, etc.) Server virtualization implementations typically include either RDP or VNC for remote access to a virtual console.
On Linux, your choices for Desktop Virtualization include:
VMware Workstation -- it's commercial, somewhat expensive, mature, and provides the most hardware, device, and guest OS support of any solution.
VMware Player -- it's commercial (freeware) and only supports VMs that were created elsewhere. Available with Ubuntu.
Parallels Workstation -- it's commercial, somewhat expensive, and not up to par with VMware. Doesn't support 64-bit guests.
VirtualBox -- available in commercial (freeware) and community versions (GPL). Fedora's preferred solution.
On Linux, your choices for Server Virtualization include:
VMware Server -- it's commercial (freeware), mature, and provides the most hardware, device, and guest OS support of any solution. Available with Ubuntu.
Xen -- it's open source. A para-virtualization solution, it has only recently added hardware-virtualization, so Windows guest support depends upon specific CPU support.
Virtual Iron -- a commercialized version of Xen that adds native virtualization.
KVM -- it's open source. It depends upon QEMU for the last mile. Ubuntu's preferred solution.
Linux-VServer -- it's open source. It provides virtual jails based on the host OS kernel, so no Windows guests.
For myself, I stick with VMware Workstation (7+ years) and VMware Server for my Linux-hosted virtualization needs. At work, it's VMware Workstation (on Windows), VMware Server (on Windows), and VMware ESX (on bare metal). I'll probably have another look at Xen, KVM, and VirtualBox at some point, but for right now compatibility between work and home is paramount.
2008 Oct
To be filled in at October to reflect the market status then.
2008 Sept
Products/services/technologies currently existing
VMware
Xen
VirtualBox
VServer
???
Comparisons
???
Recommendations for particular application areas
Home multi-boot replacement
Small business which has MS-Windows legacy applications
Datacenter of multinational corporation
???
W Craig Trader answer is great, but just to add there is also User-mode Linux (UML) which has been around for a while - it has been in the mainline kernel tree since 2.6.0 . Note that I haven't used it myself.
Ubuntu prefers KVM, and I believe Red Hat is moving to it over Xen now as well. Both KVM and Xen can be managed by libvirt, optionally through the virtual machine manager GUI. The virtual machine manager can manage remote instances through ssh connections.
In addition, a good comparison can be found here (pdf). Lots of performance tests done. The short version is that xen and linux-vserver were generally the best on performance grounds.