Linux Kernel to Include KVM Virtualization

It looks like the newest version of the Linux kernel (2.6.20) will include KVM, the relatively new virtualization environment. From the article: "Thanks to its approach KVM already runs in the current kernel, without any extensive bouts of patching and compiling being required, after the fairly simple compilation of a module. Virtual machines that run unmodified operating systems are meant to appear in the host as a simple process and work independently of the host kernel. In a fashion comparable to that of Xen a modified QEMU is used for the supportive emulation of typical PC components of the virtual machines."

Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

...but does this Linux run Linux?

KVM switch?

[advocate_one]

I take it this has nothing to do with the other meaning for KVM, Keyboard, Video, Mouse switches... there I was thinking that my Belkin KVM switch was finally gonna work properly (I have two mice connected as the switch cannot switch the mice correctly)

Re:how many KVMs

[bazorg]

yep, there just aren't enough TLA...

Re:For those brain-dead like me:

[Conley Index]

I'm disappointed that I will not be able to play with this new toy any time soon as I don't think I will be buying new hardware any time soon.

You can always emulate modern hardware...

Re:VMWare

[BokLM]

You can do that in VMWare player and VMWare server, both of which are free (as in beer).

You mean I can get drunk if I use them too much ?

Re:VMotion/HA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this at all possible with KVM? If not, are they planning it? Is it possible to approximate it with something like OpenMosix, since (IIRC) OpenMosix can move processes around dynamically when nodes fail or get bogged down, and a VM is just a process (assuming a central SAN that all the host boxes connect to)?

How about the moon on a stick? Would you like the moon on a stick?

Re:VMotion/HA?

[Stile 65]

Not unless it really IS made of cheese.

Re:how many KVMs

[the-stringbean]

Now all we need is somebody to connect a KVM (switch) to a KVM (virtualisation) machine that's running a KVM (Java KVM)!

I just know that someone is going to comment on KVM overlords soon...

Re:how many KVMs

[Anonymous Coward]

KVM overlords? - more like KVM tribbles.

Re:VMotion/HA?

[hey!]

How about the moon on a stick? Would you like the moon on a stick?

I'm an American, you insensitive clod. That means on a stick, wrapped in a pork rind, breaded, then deep fried. Mmmm.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course. But remember, it violates Microsoft's Valuable Intellectual Property each time it does so!

Microsoft's Valuable Intellectual Property is important! Respect Microsoft's Authoritah!

Re:how many KVMs

[gitargr8]

Obviously KVM wasn't registered with the Federal Acronym Registration Team or F.A.R.T. (Jon Stewart is a funny man)

Re:how many KVMs

[freakmn]

Now all we need is somebody to connect a KVM (switch) to a KVM (virtualisation) machine that's running a KVM (Java KVM)!

If I get to pick who gets to hook all this up, my vote goes to K. V. Mahadevan [wikipedia.org], who is also under KVM in wikipedia. Or perhaps a member of the Belgian Football Team [acronymfinder.com], while visiting the Kalamazoo Valley Museum [acronymfinder.com]. Actually, looking at a list of Acronyms for KVM [acronymfinder.com], it appears that this usage of KVM ranks second to last of the 8 that it lists, only above the Belgian Football team, Koninklijke Voetbalclub Mechelen. Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

KVM?

[MMC Monster]

Does this mean I can use 2 mice independently on my system? Cool!

Re:how many KVMs

[Andrewkov]

First there was KVM [wikipedia.org] switches and then there was the Java KVM [sun.com] (kilobyte VM).

Now there's the linux KVM [sf.net] which has nothing to do with either those or the Kernel VM rewrites of the linux past.

Leave that acronym alone !

KVM? Personally, I'm waiting for the Gnome version.

Re:how many KVMs

[grammar fascist]

Well you know, there are only 26 * 26 * 26 = 17576 combinations of TLAs to choose from. Of course, some are a priori more likely than others because of the relative frequencies of letters that start proper names.

And if you throw out the lame ones, you have, like, five left. That's the problem.