Skip navigation
Help

Hyper-V

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /var/www/vhosts/sayforward.com/subdomains/recorder/httpdocs/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.
Original author: 
Jon Brodkin

The Linux Foundation has taken control of the open source Xen virtualization platform and enlisted a dozen industry giants in a quest to be the leading software for building cloud networks.

The 10-year-old Xen hypervisor was formerly a community project sponsored by Citrix, much as the Fedora operating system is a community project sponsored by Red Hat. Citrix was looking to place Xen into a vendor-neutral organization, however, and the Linux Foundation move was announced today. The list of companies that will "contribute to and guide the Xen Project" is impressive, including Amazon Web Services, AMD, Bromium, Calxeda, CA Technologies, Cisco, Citrix, Google, Intel, Oracle, Samsung, and Verizon.

Amazon is perhaps the most significant name on that list in regard to Xen. The Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud is likely the most widely used public infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) cloud, and it is built on Xen virtualization. Rackspace's public cloud also uses Xen. Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin noted in his blog that Xen "is being deployed in public IaaS environments by some of the world's largest companies."

Read 4 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

An anonymous reader wrote in with a story on OS News about the latest release of the Genode Microkernel OS Framework. Brought to you by the research labs at TU Dresden, Genode is based on the L4 microkernel and aims to provide a framework for writing multi-server operating systems (think the Hurd, but with even device drivers as userspace tasks). Until recently, the primary use of L4 seems to have been as a glorified Hypervisor for Linux, but now that's changing: the Genode example OS can build itself on itself: "Even though there is a large track record of individual programs and libraries ported to the environment, those programs used to be self-sustaining applications that require only little interaction with other programs. In contrast, the build system relies on many utilities working together using mechanisms such as files, pipes, output redirection, and execve. The Genode base system does not come with any of those mechanisms let alone the subtle semantics of the POSIX interface as expected by those utilities. Being true to microkernel principles, Genode's API has a far lower abstraction level and is much more rigid in scope." The detailed changelog has information on the huge architectural overhaul of this release. One thing this release features that Hurd still doesn't have: working sound support. For those unfamiliar with multi-server systems, the project has a brief conceptual overview document.

Share on Google+

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

0
Your rating: None

Fifteen years ago, you weren't a participant in the digital age unless you had your own homepage. Even in the late 1990s, services abounded to make personal pages easy to build and deploy—the most famous is the now-defunct GeoCities, but there were many others (remember Angelfire and Tripod?). These were the days before the "social" Web, before MySpace and Facebook. Instant messaging was in its infancy and creating an online presence required no small familiarity with HTML (though automated Web design programs did exist).

Things are certainly different now, but there's still a tremendous amount of value in controlling an actual honest-to-God website rather than relying solely on the social Web to provide your online presence. The flexibility of being able to set up and run anything at all, be it a wiki or a blog with a tipjar or a photo hosting site, is awesome. Further, the freedom to tinker with both the operating system and the Web server side of the system is an excellent learning opportunity.

The author's closet. Servers tend to multiply, like rabbits. Lee Hutchinson

It's super-easy to open an account at a Web hosting company and start fiddling around there—two excellent Ars reader-recommended Web hosts are A Small Orange and Lithium Hosting—but where's the fun in that? If you want to set up something to learn how it works, the journey is just as important as the destination. Having a ready-made Web or application server cuts out half of the work and thus half of the journey. In this guide, we're going to walk you through everything you need to set up your own Web server, from operating system choice to specific configuration options.

Read 90 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

Enlarge / A diagram of a side-channel attack on a virtual machine. Using a malicious VM running on the same hardware, scientists were able to recover a private encryption key.

Zhang et al.

Piercing a key defense found in cloud environments such as Amazon's EC2 service, scientists have devised a virtual machine that can extract private cryptographic keys stored on a separate virtual machine when it resides on the same piece of hardware.

The technique, unveiled in a research paper published by computer scientists from the University of North Carolina, the University of Wisconsin, and RSA Laboratories, took several hours to recover the private key for a 4096-bit ElGamal-generated public key using the libgcrypt v.1.5.0 cryptographic library. The attack relied on "side-channel analysis," in which attackers crack a private key by studying the electromagnetic emanations, data caches, or other manifestations of the targeted cryptographic system.

One of the chief selling points of virtual machines is their ability to run a variety of tasks on a single computer rather than relying on a separate machine to run each one. Adding to the allure, engineers have long praised the ability of virtual machines to isolate separate tasks, so one can't eavesdrop or tamper with the other. Relying on fine-grained access control mechanisms that allow each task to run in its own secure environment, virtual machines have long been considered a safer alternative for cloud services that cater to the rigorous security requirements of multiple customers.

Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

Though virtual machines have become indispensable in the server room over the last few years, desktop virtualization has been less successful. One of the reasons has been performance, and specifically graphics performance—modern virtualization products are generally pretty good at dynamically allocating CPU power, RAM, and drive space as clients need them, but graphics performance just hasn't been as good as it is on an actual desktop.

NVIDIA wants to solve this problem with its VGX virtualization platform, which it unveiled at its GPU Technology Conference in May. As pitched, the technology will allow virtual machines to use a graphics card installed in a server to accelerate applications, games, and video. Through NVIDIA's VGX Hypervisor, compatible virtualization software (primarily from Citrix, though Microsoft's RemoteFX is also partially supported) can use the GPU directly, allowing thin clients, tablets, and other devices to more closely replicate the experience of using actual desktop hardware.

Enlarge / NVIDIA's VGX K1 is designed to bring basic graphics acceleration to a relatively large number of users. NVIDIA

When last we heard about the hardware that drives this technology, NVIDIA was talking up a board with four GPUs based on its Kepler architecture. That card, now known as the NVIDIA VGX K1, is built to provide basic 3D and video acceleration to a large number of users—up to 100, according to NVIDIA's marketing materials. Each of this card's four GPUs uses 192 of NVIDIA's graphics cores and 4GB of DDR3 RAM (for a total of 768 cores and 16GB of memory), and has a reasonably modest TDP of 150 watts—for reference, NVIDIA's high-end GTX 680 desktop graphics card has a TDP of 195W, and the dual-GPU version (the GTX 690) steps this up to 300W.

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

0
Your rating: None

In computing, a hypervisor, also called virtual machine manager (VMM), is one of many hardware virtualization techniques allowing multiple operating systems, termed guests, to run concurrently on a host computer. It is so named because it is conceptually one level higher than a supervisory program. The hypervisor presents to the guest operating systems a virtual operating platform and manages the execution of the guest operating systems. Multiple instances of a variety of operating systems may share the virtualized hardware resources. Hypervisors are installed on server hardware whose only task is to run guest operating systems.

The term can be used to describe the interface provided by the specific cloud computing functionality infrastructure as a service (IaaS).[1][2]

The term "hypervisor" was first used in 1965, referring to software that accompanied an IBM RPQ for the IBM 360/65. It allowed the model IBM 360/65 to share its memory: half acting like a IBM 360; half as an emulated IBM 7080. The software, labeled "hypervisor," did the switching between the 2 modes on split time basis. The term hypervisor was coined as an evolution of the term "supervisor," the software that provided control on earlier hardware.[3][4]

Classification

Robert P. Goldberg classifies two types of hypervisor:[5]

  • Type 1 (or native, bare metal) hypervisors run directly on the host's hardware to control the hardware and to manage guest operating systems. A guest operating system thus runs on another level above the hypervisor.
This model represents the classic implementation of virtual machine architectures; the original hypervisor was CP/CMS, developed at IBM in the 1960s, ancestor of IBM's z/VM. A modern equivalent of this is the Citrix XenServer, VMware ESX/ESXi, and Microsoft Hyper-V hypervisor.
  • Type 2 (or hosted) hypervisors run within a conventional operating system environment. With the hypervisor layer as a distinct second software level, guest operating systems run at the third level above the hardware. KVM and VirtualBox are examples of Type 2 hypervisors.

In other words, Type 1 hypervisor runs directly on the hardware; a Type 2 hypervisor runs on another operating system, such as FreeBSD[6] or Linux[7].

Note: Microsoft Hyper-V (released in June 2008)[8] exemplifies a type 1 product that can be mistaken for a type 2. Both the free stand-alone version and the version that is part of the commercial Windows Server 2008 product use a virtualized Windows Server 2008 parent partition to manage the Type 1 Hyper-V hypervisor. In both cases the Hyper-V hypervisor loads prior to the management operating system, and any virtual environments created run directly on the hypervisor, not via the management operating system.

Hyperviseur.png

Mainframe origins

The first hypervisor providing full virtualization, IBM's one-off research CP-40 system, began production use in January 1967, and became the first version of IBM's CP/CMS operating system. CP-40 ran on a S/360-40 that was modified at the IBM Cambridge Scientific Center to support Dynamic Address Translation, a key feature that allowed virtualization. Prior to this time, computer hardware had only been virtualized enough to allow multiple user applications to run concurrently (see CTSS and IBM M44/44X). With CP-40, the hardware's supervisor state was virtualized as well, allowing multiple operating systems to run concurrently in separate virtual machine contexts.

Programmers soon re-implemented CP-40 (as CP-67) for the IBM System/360-67, the first production computer-system capable of full virtualization. IBM first shipped this machine in 1966; it included page-translation-table hardware for virtual memory, and other techniques that allowed a full virtualization of all kernel tasks, including I/O and interrupt handling. (Note that its "official" operating system, the ill-fated TSS/360, did not employ full virtualization.) Both CP-40 and CP-67 began production use in 1967. CP/CMS was available to IBM customers from 1968 to 1972, in source code form without support.

CP/CMS formed part of IBM's attempt to build robust time-sharing systems for its mainframe computers. By running multiple operating systems concurrently, the hypervisor increased system robustness and stability: Even if one operating system crashed, the others would continue working without interruption. Indeed, this even allowed beta or experimental versions of operating systems – or even of new hardware[9] – to be deployed and debugged, without jeopardizing the stable main production system, and without requiring costly additional development systems.

IBM announced its System/370 series in 1970 without any virtualization features, but added them in the August 1972 Advanced Function announcement. Virtualization has been featured in all successor systems. (All modern-day (as of 2009[update]) IBM mainframes, such as the zSeries line, retain backwards-compatibility with the 1960s-era IBM S/360 line.) The 1972 announcement also included VM/370, a reimplementation of CP/CMS for the S/370. Unlike CP/CMS, IBM provided support for this version (though it was still distributed in source code form for several releases). VM stands for Virtual Machine, emphasizing that all, and not just some, of the hardware interfaces are virtualized. Both VM and CP/CMS enjoyed early acceptance and rapid development by universities, corporate users, and time-sharing vendors, as well as within IBM. Users played an active role in ongoing development, anticipating trends seen in modern open source projects. However, in a series of disputed and bitter battles, time-sharing lost out to batch processing through IBM political infighting, and VM remained IBM's "other" mainframe operating system for decades, losing to MVS. It enjoyed a resurgence of popularity and support from 2000 as the z/VM product, for example as the platform for Linux for zSeries.

As mentioned above, the VM control program includes a hypervisor-call handler which intercepts DIAG ("Diagnose") instructions used within a virtual machine. This provides fast-path non-virtualized execution of file-system access and other operations. (DIAG is a model-dependent privileged instruction, not used in normal programming, and thus is not virtualized. It is therefore available for use as a signal to the "host" operating system.) When first implemented in CP/CMS release 3.1, this use of DIAG provided an operating system interface that was analogous to the System/360 SVC ("supervisor call") instruction, but that did not require altering or extending the system's virtualization of SVC.

In 1985 IBM introduced the PR/SM hypervisor to manage logical partitions (LPAR).

UNIX and Linux servers

Several factors led to a resurgence around 2005[10] in the use of virtualization technology among UNIX and Linux server vendors:

  • expanding hardware capabilities, allowing each single machine to do more simultaneous work
  • efforts to control costs and to simplify management through consolidation of servers
  • the need to control large multiprocessor and cluster installations, for example in server farms and render farms
  • the improved security, reliability, and device independence possible from hypervisor architectures
  • the ability to run complex, OS-dependent applications in different hardware or OS environments

Major UNIX vendors, including Sun Microsystems, HP, IBM, and SGI, have been selling virtualized hardware since before 2000. These have generally been large systems with hefty, server-class price-tags (in the multi-million dollar range at the high end), although virtualization is also available on some mid-range systems, such as IBM's System-P servers, Sun's CoolThreads T1000, T2000 and T5x00 servers and HP Superdome series.

Multiple host operating systems have been modified[by whom?] to run as guest OSes on Sun's Logical Domains Hypervisor. As of late 2006[update], Solaris, Linux (Ubuntu and Gentoo), and FreeBSD have been ported to run on top of Hypervisor (and can all run simultaneously on the same processor, as fully virtualized independent guest OSes). Wind River "Carrier Grade Linux" also runs on Sun's Hypervisor.[11] Full virtualization on SPARC processors proved straightforward: since its inception in the mid-1980s Sun deliberately kept the SPARC architecture clean of artifacts that would have impeded virtualization. (Compare with virtualization on x86 processors below.)[12]

HP calls its technology to host multiple OS technology on its Itanium powered systems (Integrity) "Integrity Virtual Machines" (Integrity VM). Itanium can run HP-UX, Linux, Windows and OpenVMS. Except for OpenVMS, to be supported in a later release, these environments are also supported as virtual servers on HP's Integrity VM platform. The HP-UX operating system hosts the Integrity VM hypervisor layer which allows for many important features of HP-UX to be taken advantage of and provides major differentiation between this platform and other commodity platforms - such as processor hotswap, memory hotswap, and dynamic kernel updates without system reboot. While it heavily leverages HP-UX, the Integrity VM hypervisor is really a hybrid that runs on bare-metal while guests are executing. Running normal HP-UX applications on an Integrity VM host is heavily discouraged[by whom?], because Integrity VM implements its own memory management, scheduling and I/O policies that are tuned for virtual machines and are not as effective for normal applications. HP also provides more rigid partitioning of their Integrity and HP9000 systems by way of VPAR and nPar technology, the former offering shared resource partitioning and the later offering complete I/O and processing isolation. The flexibility of virtual server environment (VSE) has given way to its use more frequently in newer deployments.[citation needed]

IBM provides virtualization partition technology known as logical partitioning (LPAR) on System/390, zSeries, pSeries and iSeries systems. For IBM's Power Systems, the Power Hypervisor (PowerVM) functions as a native (bare-metal) hypervisor and provides EAL4+ strong isolation between LPARs. Processor capacity is provided to LPARs in either a dedicated fashion or on an entitlement basis where unused capacity is harvested and can be re-allocated to busy workloads. Groups of LPARs can have their processor capacity managed as if they were in a "pool" - IBM refers to this capability as Multiple Shared-Processor Pools (MSPPs) and implements it in servers with the POWER6 processor. LPAR and MSPP capacity allocations can be dynamically changed. Memory is allocated to each LPAR (at LPAR initiation or dynamically) and is address-controlled by the POWER Hypervisor. For real-mode addressing by operating systems (AIX, Linux, IBM i), the POWER processors (POWER4 onwards) have architected virtualization capabilities where a hardware address-offset is evaluated with the OS address-offset to arrive at the physical memory address. Input/Output (I/O) adapters can be exclusively "owned" by LPARs or shared by LPARs through an appliance partition known as the Virtual I/O Server (VIOS). The Power Hypervisor provides for high levels of reliability, availability and serviceability (RAS) by facilitating hot add/replace of many parts (model dependent: processors, memory, I/O adapters, blowers, power units, disks, system controllers, etc.)

Similar trends have occurred with x86/x86_64 server platforms, where open-source projects such as Xen have led virtualization efforts. These include hypervisors built on Linux and Solaris kernels as well as custom kernels. Since these technologies span from large systems down to desktops, they are described in the next section.

PCs and desktop systems

Interest in the high-profit server-hardware market sector has led to the development of hypervisors for machines using the Intel x86 instruction set, including for traditional desktop PCs. One of the early PC hypervisors, the commercial-software VMware, debuted in 1998.

The x86 architecture used in most PC systems poses particular difficulties to virtualization. Full virtualization (presenting the illusion of a complete set of standard hardware) on x86 has significant costs in hypervisor complexity and run-time performance. Starting in 2005, CPU vendors have added hardware virtualization assistance to their products, for example: Intel's Intel VT-x (codenamed Vanderpool) and AMD's AMD-V (codenamed Pacifica). These extensions address the parts of x86 that are difficult or inefficient to virtualize, providing additional support to the hypervisor. This enables simpler virtualization code and a higher performance for full virtualization.

An alternative approach requires modifying the guest operating-system to make system calls to the hypervisor, rather than executing machine I/O instructions which the hypervisor then simulates. This is called paravirtualization in Xen, a "hypercall" in Parallels Workstation, and a "DIAGNOSE code" in IBM's VM. VMware supplements the slowest rough corners of virtualization with device drivers for the guest. All are really the same thing, a system call to the hypervisor below. Some microkernels such as Mach and L4 are flexible enough such that "paravirtualization" of guest operating systems is possible.

In June 2008 Microsoft delivered a new Type-1 hypervisor called Hyper-V (codenamed "Viridian" and previously referred to as "Windows Server virtualization"); the design features OS integration at the lowest level.[13] Versions of the Windows operating system beginning with Windows Vista include extensions to boost performance when running on top of the Hyper-V hypervisor.

Embedded systems

As of 2009[update] virtual machines have started to appear in embedded systems, such as mobile phones. This provides a high-level operating-system interface for application programming, such as Linux or Microsoft Windows, while at the same time maintaining traditional real-time operating system (RTOS) APIs. The low-level RTOS environments need to be retained for legacy support, and because the real-time capabilities of high-level OSes are insufficient for many embedded applications.

Embedded hypervisors must therefore have real-time capability, a design criterion not present for hypervisors used in other domains. The resource-constrained nature of many embedded systems, especially battery-powered mobile systems, imposes a further requirement for small memory-size and low overhead. Finally, in contrast to the ubiquity of the x86 architecture in the PC world, the embedded world uses a wider variety of architectures. Support for virtualization requires memory protection (in the form of a memory management unit or at least a memory protection unit) and a distinction between user mode and privileged mode, which rules out most microcontrollers. This still leaves x86, MIPS, ARM and PowerPC as widely deployed architectures on medium- to high-end embedded systems.

As manufacturers of embedded systems usually have the source code to their operating systems, they have less need for full virtualization in this space. Instead, the performance advantages of paravirtualization make this usually the virtualization technology of choice. Nevertheless, ARM has recently added full virtualization support as an IP option and has included it in their latest high end processor codenamed Eagle.

Other differences between virtualization in server/desktop and embedded environments include requirements for efficient sharing of resources across virtual machines, high-bandwidth, low-latency inter-VM communication, a global view of scheduling and power management, and fine-grained control of information flows.[14]

Security implications

The use of hypervisor technology by malware and rootkits installing themselves as a hypervisor below the operating system can make them more difficult to detect because the malware could intercept any operations of the operating system (such as someone entering a password) without the antivirus software necessarily detecting it (since the malware runs below the entire operating system). Implementation of the concept has allegedly occurred in the SubVirt laboratory rootkit (developed jointly by Microsoft and University of Michigan researchers[15]) as well as in the Blue Pill malware package. However, such assertions have been disputed by others who claim that it would indeed be possible to detect the presence of a hypervisor-based rootkit.[16]

In 2009, researchers from Microsoft and North Carolina State University demonstrated a hypervisor-layer anti-rootkit called Hooksafe that can provide generic protection against kernel-mode rootkits.[17]

See also

0
Your rating: None

judgecorp writes "The OpenStack open source cloud project has removed Hyper-V from its infrastructure as a service (IaaS) framework, saying Microsoft's support for its hypervisor technology is 'broken.' This will embarass Microsoft, as major partners such as Dell and HP support OpenStack, along with service providers such as Internap." Adds reader alphadogg, this "means the code will be removed when the next version of OpenStack, called Essex, is released in the second quarter."


Share on Google+

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

0
Your rating: None

[Video Link, by Beschizza.]

As part of an ongoing hunt for LulzSec, the FBI raided DigitalOne's data center today. But sloppy work by agents in charge of the raid caused unrelated websites to go offline. The victims included Instapaper, and various restaurant and real estate sites belonging to Curbed Network. From the New York Times:

DigitalOne provided all necessary information to pinpoint the servers for a specific I.P. address, Mr. Ostroumow said. However, the agents took entire server racks, perhaps because they mistakenly thought that "one enclosure is = to one server," he said in an e-mail.

DigitalOne had no employees on-site when the raid took place. The data center operator, from which DigitalOne leases space, passed along the information about the raid three hours after it started with the name of the agent and a phone number to call.

0
Your rating: None