On 07/23/2012 08:58 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 23 July 2012 15:30, Avi Kivity <[email protected]> wrote: >> But I was only joking. Nested virtualization is interesting technically >> but so far I haven't seen any huge or even small uptake. > > Yes; that (as I understand it) is why it wasn't an expected use > case for the architecture extensions. The other related thing that > might be surprising for x86-background people is that being > able to present the guest with a virtual CPU that looks like > a pre-virtualization CPU (eg the A9) isn't really an intended > use case either. (The ARM world has much less of the 'everything > must be fully backwards compatible for existing OSes' than x86...)
I expect this to change once ARM servers become a reality. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
