Re: [9fans] qemu, kvm, xen

["Eric Van Hensbergen" <ericvh@gmail.com>]

On 4/6/07, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> boot:
> qemu, 60 seconds
> kvm, 100 seconds (yes, indeed, kvm did indeed boot more slowly than
> plain old qemu)
> xen, 6 seconds (it's nice)
>
> build a pccpuf kernel:
> qemu, 100 seconds
> kvm, 80 seconds
> xen, 12 seconds
>
> So, the choice for speed is still xen. THX will remain xen-based for now.
>

I/O is really going to suck with KVM right now -- after all, they are
using qemu for all their I/O emulation, so it makes sense that they
would be as slow.  The fact that boot is almost double qemu is kinda
crazy (is that qemu + kqemu, or vanilla qemu?) -- I mean I know they
are setting up some extra shit, but double the time is nuts.

kvm will catch up as soon as better paravirtualization interfaces are
integrated (particularly for I/O) -- this is why I wanted to push 9p
as the KVM paravirtualized I/O interface -- its clear they need to
close that gap.

         -eric