5 ms·
Looks like this is just the "Virtualization Extensions" (apple silicon support) for the hypervisor framework (which has been around since 10.10 and is used by x
by stock_toaster 6y ago
Looks like this is just the "Virtualization Extensions" (apple silicon support) for the hypervisor framework (which has been around since 10.10 and is used by xhyve, and I believe the macos docker port?):
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/hypervisor https://developer.apple.com/documentation/hypervisor
Is that correct?
- ArgyleSound 6y agoHigh level ObjC APIs vs lower level C APIs
- ytch 6y agoMaybe we can view it as a high-level API of hypervisor framework?
- saagarjha 6y agoNo, this looks separate. You'll notice the APIs have to do with virtualized networks and filesystems, rather than lower-level hypervisor tasks (creating and running virtual machines, servicing exits, etc.)
- lstamour 6y agoPossibly it was needed for no-driver virtualization while preserving the same functionally of https://blogs.vmware.com/teamfusion/2020/07/fusion-big-sur-tech-preview.html https://blogs.vmware.com/teamfusion/2020/07/fusion-big-sur-t... — note there’s a newer beta if you view the community link, I think, and I can’t find an equivalent public beta from Parallels yet but presumably they’re working hard on it...
- pilif 6y agoThat VMWare tech preview ran in Beta 2 already which didn’t have this framework yet. No kernel extension required
- lstamour 6y agoI’ll admit though I ran it in Beta 2, I’m not aware of the details of which release had which API or which features VMware is using or not. It’s possible VMWare, having inside access to Apple docs, started working with private APIs that Apple has now made public? I really don’t know the details, I’d be happy if others chimed in, though. :)
- saagarjha 6y agoIf by “no-driver” you mean “no kernel extensions”, that’s just part of Hypervisor.framework which shipped years ago. Perhaps they just added support for that?
- lstamour 6y agoMy understanding is the Hypervisor framework didn’t easily support file system connectivity like fuse or different networking scenarios with virtio but perhaps the new, linked, APIs here in Big Sur now offer that? I presume Apple asked VMWare and Parallels why neither used the new Hypervisor framework and this was the resulting collaboration, but it might also have come about simply because Apple wanted to demo virtualization on ARM, of course...
- kergonath 6y agoParallels have been able to use Hypervisor.framework already since version 12, AFAIK. that was not yesterday.
- lstamour 6y agoAnd it reportedly had limitations, including performance: https://communities.vmware.com/thread/551842 https://communities.vmware.com/thread/551842 This is something Apple and VMware are now obviously working on together for Big Sur.
- stephenr 6y agoParallels has had a shipping product that uses Hypervisor.framework for a couple of years - its how they ship Parllels Lite (or whatever it's called) in the MAS. In the non-MAS version there's a per-VM option to use either Parallels' or Apples' Hypervisor.
- PopeDotNinja 6y agoI believe Docker For Mac uses Hyperkit now, an offshoot of xhyve. https://github.com/moby/hyperkit https://github.com/moby/hyperkit
- 4ad 6y agoxhyve uses Hypervisor.framework internally. It's just a port of bhyve's drivers to macOS's native hypervisor.
- PopeDotNinja 6y agoRight. For clarification purposes, Hyperkit is a fork (I think) of xhyve. Both Hyperkit and xhyve use Hypervisor.framework.