Paravirtualization Interface.

[hack3rcon]

I know Both "Hyper-V" and "KVM" and I asked it because the user said "Xen" not exit as an option because VirtualBox is not "Xen" and I mean is that VirtualBox is not "KVM" and "Hyper-V" too but why these are exist and "Xen" not exist.

[mpack]

If memory servers me properly I explained this to them once before, ...

You did indeed, it was here. The OP ended up meandering pointlessly around the subject of Xen in that thread too.

[hack3rcon]

OK, Why not a specific timers for Xen? Is it because "Xen" is Type-1?

[scottgus1]

Why not Xen?

I also will have to remind you of something posted earlier:

The Dev-Mind-Read API has not been completed yet (it's still in alpha) so we cannot tell why the developers have chosen or not chosen to implement a certain feature we think would be cool/important/critical to have. You can suggest an enhancement on the Bugtracker.

This dead horse is so beaten down it's mush....

[mpack]

VirtualBox does not provide a Xen compatible API. End of story. We are users not devs so we cannot answer why or whether this will ever change.

I'm willing to leave room for a serious proposal for why adding a Xen compatible guest API makes good business sense: I suggest you start by explaining which guests need this API - but endless repetition of "why not Xen", all while ignoring the responses... is getting to be quite tedious. Please get to the point or I'm going to lock this topic.

[hack3rcon]

"KVM" makes good business sense?

[mpack]

A KVM API can be used by modern Linux kernels.

A Hyper-v API can be used by modern Windows kernels.

Who can use a Xen API? Other than Linux I mean, since that market segment is already served by the KVM API.

It seems to me that your questions are no better than someone who comes along to ask "why not emulate the WizBang-1000 network card"? And the answer is that we don't need to, as the software already implements an equivalent API which is supported by native drivers in the target guest OS. If you want to argue that it's vital to emulate the WizBang-1000 then it's for you to explain why, not for us to explain why not.

[hack3rcon]

You can't compare "Xen" with "KVM"
"Xen" can't used by Modern Linux kernel? Your problem is that you don't know "Hyper-V" is a bare metal like "Xen" and just windows use it

[Perryg]

"Xen" can't used by Modern Linux kernel? Your problem is that you don't know "Hyper-V" is a bare metal like "Xen" and just windows use it

This is totally false. Both of these still use a special type of kernel to be able to boot from just like any other "OS" Negating the real meaning of type-1 vs type-2 But most people have their minds made up due to really good propaganda and I will not go down that rabbit hole. Why not instead open your mind and figure this all out yourself? It appears you really want to know. Study the rings and the light bulb will go off once you see the real truth.

[socratis]

In "The future of VirtualBox" thread, also started by "hack3rcon" with the same idea (generally speaking) and the same (vague) arguments, my last post was:

I wholeheartedly agree. The title, the content and the posts start to remind random rumblings. If there is no specific point in this discussion (not that there was any), I'm locking this. Or whatever comes first...

[mpack]

You can't compare "Xen" with "KVM"

Nor am I interested in doing so.

"Xen" can't used by Modern Linux kernel?

I said nothing of the sort.

Last chance. Your next post had better be blindingly insightful.

[hack3rcon]

"Xen" can't used by Modern Linux kernel? Your problem is that you don't know "Hyper-V" is a bare metal like "Xen" and just windows use it

This is totally false. Both of these still use a special type of kernel to be able to boot from just like any other "OS" Negating the real meaning of type-1 vs type-2 But most people have their minds made up due to really good propaganda and I will not go down that rabbit hole. Why not instead open your mind and figure this all out yourself? It appears you really want to know. Study the rings and the light bulb will go off once you see the real truth.

Yes. I like to know it really.
In your idea "Hyper-V" is not bare metal?

[hack3rcon]

The Oracle problem is that it add "KVM" and "Hyper-V" in Paravirtualization Interface because of "Red Hat" and "Microsoft" but "Xen" is open source and not have any commercial sponsor, But if you open your eyes then you can see that many companies use Xen as Cloud. Like Amazon, Rackspace, Oracle and...
VirtualBox is for Oracle and "OracleVM" use Xen technology then why not Xen in Paravirtualization Interface?
Please read "http://www.infoworld.com/article/262701 ... hel-6.html". Xen no need Red hat

[Perryg]

Let me ask you this. What does it take to talk to real hardware ( bare metal )? We used to call it 0's and 1's. It takes software translation because no one writes in hex so now it is called a translator. hyper-v, xen, Etc. talk to the hardware for you and that is not written in assembler these days so no it is not running on bare metal IMHO it is using a custom kernel and that makes it an OS albeit one with a limited subset.

You can use linux with xen if you load its custom kernel. Actually the University of Cambridge and the linux foundation started the xen hypervisor project and used it with Linux so study and find out for yourself. You have Internet connectivity and search engines. Nothing is as it appears. But this has nothing to do with VirtualBox. If you want to use xen because you think it solves all of your wants/needs or even hyper-v, then do so ( I have used them all ). You have the right but as far as VirtualBox is concerned this is outside of the scope of this forum and I probably will not respond further to this discussion.

Edit: I see you posted again while I was replying telling me to open my eyes and see. Funny or should I say amusing. Perhaps you should open your mind. You have a great day and enjoy what ever you choose to use. I have better things to do and have un-subscribed from the thread.

[Martin]

Can you tell us if such a special timer interface like it is used by OS kernels for Windows/Hyper-V or Linux even exists in a XEN environment?
Did you read our answers at all, that this settting has nothing to do with interfacing to a running Hyper-V/KVM/... somewhere?
Maybe Oracle just doesn't have big commercial customers who need more than the available settings?