4 ms·
Kinda misses the point of unikernels. The hypervisor already does all the necessary scheduling. You don't need another scheduler.
by dkarapetyan 9y ago
Kinda misses the point of unikernels. The hypervisor already does all the necessary scheduling. You don't need another scheduler.
- glandium 9y agohypervisor+unikernels do sound a lot like microkernel+processes...
- ori_b 9y agoUnikernels are processes with a really funny system call ABI.
- rwmj 9y agoIf you run them in qemu then this becomes very clear. Even better (or worse?) the strange system call ABI is translated into regular system calls by the qemu process.
- justincormack 9y agoHypervisors are often microkernels, eg Xen is. Obviously KVM isn't as it's Linux...
- btrask 9y agoI think a unikernel+ProcOS is basically the same as a hypervisor+unikernel, except backwards. The main advantages would be less overhead (one unikernel, instead of N) and greater flexibility (because ProcOS can run on any OS without a VM). The emphasis on cheap recursion (if it can be achieved) also has benefits like making administrative responsibilities easier to delegate, and preventing various isolation leaks (including scheduling fairness).