From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HWwYI-0000MC-0k
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 11:28:38 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HWwYG-0000Jy-Lj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 11:28:37 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HWwYG-0000Jo-Hp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:28:36 -0500
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1HWwVf-0002ul-3i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 11:25:55 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU Alpha target
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:25:51 +0100
References: <20070317143730.1befbf94@neuling>
	<200703291608.26347.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20070329151209.GA6635@miranda.arrow>
In-Reply-To: <20070329151209.GA6635@miranda.arrow>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200703291625.51752.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Thursday 29 March 2007 16:12, Stuart Brady wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 04:08:25PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > > There do seem to be a few people who'd like Alpha emulation for QEMU.
> > > Obviously, you'd want to get dynamic translation working first. :-)
> > >
> > > OTOH, I'm now wondering which archs can support full virtualisation.
> >
> > Depends how you define "full virtualization". If you call kqemu full
> > virtualization then you can do that on pretty much any CPU.
>
> I meant "meeting Popek and Goldberg's virtualisation requirements".

In that case, I suspect most of them don't.
x86 certainly doesn't. Recent VT/SVM extensions bring it close, but there are 
still problems.
PPC and SPARC also have hypervisor extensions, which suggests the conventional 
instruction sets don't allow full virtualization.

Paul