From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 9 13:57:57 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4DC106564A for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 13:57:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdong.yi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42958FC17 for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 13:57:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so11154512bwz.13 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 05:57:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4u/pSMy7tgmbS0z1in8YQXW43rUFXFpRjzHVM1xUxRs=; b=MIzLjeMED8JAJGLkUn8fDg5N34ZUs0zwwHa6iYqcAL55A+PYYZloXkA1y8u1sutxX9 ui81vm7osVennYY8N/1A26O8EY/73Kj24H9p8YeLwxf5caAzCFSpNXnZJxh39oUZPrt7 U0DLqf3YHrXStGtCS6HU70IIJ7D13r13KTyi4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=A9ETj+ljWk1Z0aQR/e3A7tPFz6SEfRjTFk7hJCvGbA4qR8B36vvC0RIrnG/ZPQ4eaJ SRsPJgeXzJ/ZGw40queN5FTysnJCjI/s0vfF0AoFwY0jRo8ZlBQxRhg+gfkI0gkWrU/Y ZMbqTrA4JEUHYrMriaj2tynzjkxbhmGoF8vRI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.114.81 with SMTP id d17mr14009229bkq.135.1294581472593; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 05:57:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.153.20 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 05:57:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110109110022.GA10789@triton8.kn-bremen.de> References: <20100418191752.GA72730@triton8.kn-bremen.de> <20110107194516.GA28544@triton8.kn-bremen.de> <20110107213643.GA32645@triton8.kn-bremen.de> <20110109110022.GA10789@triton8.kn-bremen.de> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 21:57:52 +0800 Message-ID: From: Xiaodong Yi To: Juergen Lock Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testing Luvalley with FreeBSD as dom0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 13:57:57 -0000 Yes, license is a big problem. And I'm sorry to let you and Brandon know that Luvalley is currently using KVM's code. And I think it's hard and unnecessary to write the virtualization code from scratch. Do you think so? Best regards, Xiaodong 2011/1/9 Juergen Lock : > On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 12:33:59AM -0600, Brandon Gooch wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Xiaodong Yi wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I confirm that I no longer have time for Luvalley. However, I will be >> > extreemly happy if anybody is willing to take over from me. >> > Especially, I quite agree to customize Luvalley for FreeBSD, through >> > it supports all kinds of Dom0 OSes. Howerver, I hope that the LIGHT >> > architecture of Luvalley could be kept. Maybe it is useful to patch >> > dom0 FreeBSD kernel (especially for interrupt handling), but it should >> > not be very complex. Part of the code comes from KVM, and I suggest to >> > keep flying with KVM to make sure that guest VMs work well. >> >> I believe that if serious effort were to be put forward by the FreeBSD >> developers to further develop the code, the result would need to be >> GPL and Linux free (or VERY close to it). This is an area of >> contention within the FreeBSD developer and user community, so it >> would need to be addressed. As the developer of Luvalley, do you have >> the ability to re-license the code using a BSD license? >> >> Are there too many technical issues with the code to do this? Juergen >> mentioned that bits of the code are based on (or pulled directly >> from?) Linux KVM. That probably wouldn't fly here... >> >> > Luvalley does boot and run on bare hardware. =A0But it does not taint >> > dom0 FreeBSD. Although the `non-root' mode dom0 FreeBSD kernel has >> > direct access to BIOS and hardware, Luvalley tries hard to coordinate >> > with it. For example, Luvalley traps the BIOS calls from the FreeBSD >> > kernel to report the modified E820 table. Another example is that >> > Luvalley uses NMI as the IPI interrupt to avoid conflict with BSD >> > kernel. And I also believe that simple patches could work if some >> > corners of FreeBSD kernel are tainted. >> > >> > Regards, and looking forward to the following news ... >> > >> > Xiaodong >> >> As am I... >> >> Thanks for chiming in Xiaodong! > > Actually with `tainting' the FreeBSD kernel I meant causing it to be > affected by the gpl and its requirements. =A0So if someone were to ship > e.g. an appliance that uses Luvalley and a modified FreeBSD kernel he > would only have to provide sourcecode of Luvalley and the userland > Luvalley version of qemu-kvm, not of his FreeBSD kernel modifications, > or of other (non-gpl) userland apps for that matter. > > =A0But again, IANAL. :) > > =A0Cheers, > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Juergen (also hoping Luvalley will have a future...) >