Re: Capabilities, Anybody?

Scott Lurndal wrote:

mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) writes:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:11:55 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:

>

The architectural features supporting virtualization are designed to
isolate guests from both the hypervisor and other guests.

>

Providing an entire separate kernel for each VM is often unnecessary. If you need separation at the level of entire subsystems, as opposed to individual processes, then that’s what containers are for.

>
>
If you are running k Linuxes under a single HyperVisor, you should be able
to share all the Linux code after giving each of them their own VaS for data.

Bad idea.  Single point of failure.  Impossible to update one without
updating all.  Linux does update code dynamically when loading and
unloading kernel modules.

I actually have a 4-level system:: HyperVisor is the only layer that is not
allowed to crash (RISC-V calls this machine). Progressing towards less privilege
is GuestHV, GuestOS, and Application. Hypervisor provides only memory, timing,
and device identification services. GuestHV provides what most would call the
HyperVisor, GuestOS woudl be LINUX, and everybody knows what an application is.