QEMU Version 5.0.0 Released (qemu.org) 21
The developers of the open-source QEMU (Quick EMUlator) emulator, which can run programs on various architectures such as ARM and RISC-V, have released version 5.0. Slashdot reader syn3rg writes: Hot on the heels of the 4.0 release (from a major release perspective), the QEMU team has released version 5.0. This version has many changes, including:
- Live migration support for external processes running on QEMU D-Bus
- Support for using memory backends for main/"built-in" guest RAM
- block: support for compressed backup images via block jobs
- ARM: support for the following architecture features: ARMv8.1 VHE/VMID16/PAN/PMU ARMv8.2 UAO/DCPoP/ATS1E1/TTCNP ARMv8.3 RCPC/CCIDX ARMv8.4 PMU/RCPC
- ARM: support for Cortex-M7 CPU
- ARM: new board support for tacoma-bmc, Netduino Plus 2, and Orangepi PC
- MIPS: support for GINVT (global TLB invalidation) instruction
- PowerPC: 'powernv' machine can now emulate KVM hardware acceleration to run KVM guests while in TCG mode
- PowerPC: support for file-backed NVDIMMs for persistent memory emulation
- RISC-V: experimental support for v0.5 of draft hypervisor extension
- s390: support for Adapter Interrupt Suppression while running in KVM mode
"Not a current user, but I'm happy to see the project advancing," adds syn3rg.
For the full list of changes, you can visit the changelog. QEMU 5.0 can downloaded here.
Downstream effect (Score:5, Informative)
Since some Virtualization technologies like KVM, and VirtualBox rely in part on QEMU, the best thing for me about this release is the improvements that this will bring to Virtualization in general.
Re: (Score:1)
...and ProxMox too. Fully agree!
Specifically, qemu calls kvm (Score:5, Informative)
To clarify this a bit, kvm (kernel virtual machine) is the in-kernel part of the system. It directly uses the virtualization hardware within the CPU. Note here that the virtualization provided by CPU, and used by kvm, is for the same type of CPU - an amd64 guest running on an amd64 host. This is very very fast.
Qemu is the userland side. It calls into kvm when a VM is running the same type of CPU as the host. Qemu can also emulate other architectures in software, so you can run an ARM guest on an amd64 host.
Virt-manager is the user interface this system. It provides buttons you can click and friendly cli commands. (Qemu provides less friendly cli and no GUI).
Virtual box does the same job as virt-manager and qemu.
It has lower performance, but the marketing budget and corporate support from Oracle. It's also cross-platform, making it easier to move a guest from a Windows host to a Linux host or Mac host. Not that it's that hard to do that with just a generic disk image.
Virtual box uses some code from qemu.
Re: (Score:2)
I always advise people to avoid running VirtualBox for serious work. Oracle has been known to track downloads of its software and serve up lawsuits if they think you're using it for commercial purposes without paying them for a support contract.
Virtual box is free GPL, the extension pack is not (Score:2)
Just a note, the base Virtual box is free and GPL.
The extension pack which includes things like USB and RDP support is NOT.
https://www.virtualbox.org/wik... [virtualbox.org]
Qemu and virt-manager IS all free and has better performance. On Linux, Qemu is definitely the better choice in terms of technical reasons. If you WANT to buy support from Oracle, that's when you would choose Virtualbox on Linux.
Qemu is also available for Mac because Mac is Unix.
A Windows build of Qemu is available and I get the impression that's not w
Re: (Score:2)
There's no risk of that. VirtualBox is under the GPL. I expect most downloads come from the repos for various Linux distros.
Update - qemu is also cross-platform (Score:2)
In the comparison I mentioned that Virtualbox is cross-platform. I just realized that Qemu ia toom
Qemu is also available for Mac because Mac is Unix.
A Windows build of Qemu is available; I get the impression that's not where the developers are focused. The qemu team releases official builds for Linux and Mac, and links to somebody's build for Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: Wait... (Score:2)
I use OS/2 2.00... It runs all my critical apps!
I just never saw the need to upgrade.
Re: (Score:2)
Ease of Use (Score:3)
Once QEMU matures to the point where it's easy to use (or can be used without the user knowing they're using it) then it really will change how we look at hardware and compatibility. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple dips into the QEMU code to make their ARM transition more seamless. Hopefully they do that, as QEMU would greatly benefit from contributions from Apple.
Apple and QEMU (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple dips into the QEMU code to make their ARM transition more seamless. Hopefully they do that, as QEMU would greatly benefit from contributions from Apple.
While I also would like that to happen, (as I use apple machines for the time being and I am a technical trainer for Openstack), we have to face reality...
Apple is quite hostile to the GPL. I see them more tapping into Bochs (LGPL), or even GXemul (even if they have to write the whole A-64 from scratch) since is BSD licensed, than going to the more mature, but GPL licensed QEMU... :-(
Other options for Apple to add A-64 compatibility to ARM include:
* Begging IBM to re-License Rosetta to them (IBM acquired th
Re: (Score:2)
I really hope Apple doesn't switch to ARM for Macs. That would be yet ANOTHER deprecation event, and Apple has already pissed off developers by deprecating multiple technologies in the past few years. (OpenGL and 32-bit code being the most recent.)
Re:Apple and ARM (Score:2)
I really hope Apple doesn't switch to ARM for Macs. That would be yet ANOTHER deprecation event, and Apple has already pissed off developers by deprecating multiple technologies in the past few years. (OpenGL and 32-bit code being the most recent.)
I also hope that they stay in the X-86/A-64 camp.
I entered the apple ecosystem in early 2009, so I did not live through the 68k--->PPC or PPC ---> X86/A64, so I have no grievances there. But Apple's current hardware direction is diverging from my particular needs (soldered RAM and soldered SSD, both in laptops and desktops), they going to ARM will make me ditch them and go back to Windows10 (even if they implement bootcamp for the ARM/64 version of Windows). And also, I am stuck in Mojave in order to
What, no mention of virtiofsd? (Score:2)
Finally you can share files between host and guest without running samba or any network filesystem or even networking.
Re: (Score:2)
I was a bit excited about this until I read that it relies on FUSE. I have never seen a FUSE filesystem implementation that wasn't slow as balls.
Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I certainly don't expect to be!
Re: (Score:1)
I've used FUSE and while it's certainly slower than native drivers I find it quite usable.
In any case slow is way better than nothing.