|
|
|
|
|
|
by binary132
535 days ago
|
|
|
a hvm is only running via hardware assisted virtualization if the guest is using the same ISA; a non-native guest is still "real virtualization", if all else is equal, isn't it? in that case, wouldn't the processor be the same thing as a "CPU emulator"? if not, how is it different? I guess what I'm trying to say is maybe the distinction you're drawing isn't really as distinct as you think it is; if this project had virtualized devices and a kernel driving them instead of passing through syscalls, would that be real virtualization, assuming we're talking about a non-native guest ISA? don't vm guest drivers abstractly just pass through to syscalls / host drivers anyway? what if there was no OS and the user's code implemented those drivers? aren't virtualized devices "just setting up a datastructure and calling a function" too? if not, what are they? like, do you see how this is really a spectrum or collection of system components with levels of virtualization? CPU-only virtualization with syscall sandboxes is still more secure and useful than fancy chroot. |
|
|
For me the reason for the distinction between hardware virtualization and emulation based virtualization is the differences in suitability based on instance creation cost, and instruction performance, and as you mention security.
My usage was just an attempt to explain why I saw a distinction, not to pedantically define any of the terms. My apologies if you felt I used them incorrectly.