From: arne@vajhoej.dk   
      
   On 12/3/2024 11:10 AM, Dan Cross wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   > Arne Vajhøj   wrote:   
   >> On 12/3/2024 10:36 AM, Dan Cross wrote:   
   >>> In article ,   
   >>> Arne Vajhøj   wrote:   
   >>>> KVM runs in Linux not on Linux. Which makes it type 1.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nope.  KVM is dependent on Linux at this point.  The claim that   
   >>> it is a type-1 hypervisor is predicated on the idea that it was   
   >>> separable from Linux, but I don't think anyone believes that   
   >>> anymore.   
   >>   
   >> It is the opposite. KVM is type 1 not because it is separable   
   >>from Linux but because it is inseparable from Linux.   
   >   
   > Kinda.  The claim is that KVM turns Linux+KVM into a type-1   
   > hypervisor; that is, the entire combination becomes a the HV.   
   > That's sort of a silly distinction, though, since the real   
   > differentiator, defined by Goldberg, is whether or not the VMM   
   > makes use of existing system services, which KVM very much does.   
      
   ESXi is basic OS functionality and virtualization services   
   in a single kernel.   
      
   Linux+KVM is basic OS functionality and virtualization services   
   in a single kernel.   
      
   They are logical working the same way.   
      
   The differences are not in how they work, but in history   
   and reusability in other contexts:   
   * Linux existed before KVM   
   * Linux has more functionality so it can be and is used without KVM   
      
   But type 1 vs type 2 should depend on how it works not on   
   history and reusability in other contexts.   
      
   Arne   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)