"Microsoft Wants To Create A Complete Virtualization Stack With Linux"

[Spacefish]

So how much code is in the Microkernel Hyper-V Hypervisor, and can we write a Open Source version of it, license it MIT and let Oracle release it as a product?!

[bridgman]

The root partition in the context of the Microsoft Hypervisor is similar to Xeon's Dom0 that is used for starting and managing the unprivileged domains in turn.

Guessing this should say "Xen's Dom0" ?

[duby229]

You are right this is not EEE but a different strategy like FFSSM (Fake friends Sneaky snake move):

Do things that make it seem like were friends but actually only do thing because they have to do it.
Like running linux on azure, wow we are best friends. The reality is no one wanted to run microsoft oses so instead of die they had to let people run linux.
Best friend where is fat32/exfat/ntfs source and free use for everyone, oh not a have to do that situation.

MS's actions here are almost definitely a part of their much larger EEE scheme to kill linux. So while these actions alone may not seem to be EEE, they in fact just peices of a grander scheme to kill linux.

I'm just stating my own opinion. I could post facts about what I believe MS grander scheme really is, but then I'd have to get a fuckin fire house to spray at starshipeleven just to cool his retarded attitude off.

[starshipeleven]

You are right this is not EEE but a different strategy like FFSSM (Fake friends Sneaky snake move):

Cut this juvenile crap. Most corporations that contribute do Linux development don't do it because they are "best friends forever", but because they profit from Linux in one way or another. It's more similar to an alliance, and Microsoft is no different.

Do things that make it seem like were friends

Uhm, no they don't? They aren't sponsoring Linux development, they are adding support for their own products in Linux, and adding features they want to use in their own products, which may or may not matter for others. That's an obvious interest in making profit on Linux here, not "friendship".

Best friend where is fat32/exfat/ntfs source and free use for everyone, oh not a have to do that situation.

There is no profit in providing a driver for fat32/exfat/ntfs to Linux, besides, with Paragon stepping up and trying to upstream their ntfs driver the situation should be covered already.

[onlyLinuxLuvUBack]

I can read the wikipedia or other places that clearly state what EEE is? Yes I can.

1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the "simple" standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.

Now, let's examine the current case.

Embrace: ok, they are adding stuff to Linux, following its standards and whatnot. check.

Extend: umm, Linux has already 2 other native hypervisors that have more or less the same feature set, so it's not like you NEED to use Hyper-V if you want an hypervisor. No " Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product". First strike.
All hypervisors are incompatible with each other (in the sense that the host can only run one bare metal, the others must be under it, with nested virtualization) and VMs need to be converted from one to the other, and this is a technical limitation due to what hypervisors are, not an artificial limitation part of EEE maneuver. So a first interpretation of "creating interoperability problems" is not possible, as an Hypervisor is incompatible with other Hypervisors by definition already, so being incompatible does not hurt other features offering the same functionality. Second strike.
Since all the support for Hyper-V is in their own kernel module(s), they have no way to "create interoperability problems" with KVM or Xen at the kernel level, even if they add incompatible functionality, distros that want to use KVM or Xen will just disable the Hyper-V support on compile time or provide different kernels with differents features (one for KVM/Xen and one for Hyper-V). So the second interpretation of "creating interoperability problems" is not possible, the feature can be switched off on compile time, Microsoft does not control Linux development and must still obey kernel development rules if they want to be merged upstream. Third strike.
There is no valid Extend here, the chain is broken.

Extinguish: The only way to get to this point is competition on hypervisor features and that is completely tangential to Linux. If Hyper-V somehow becomes plain better than KVM and Xen it has done so on its merits alone, not because it has somehow stifled development of KVM/Xen or threw sand in their developer's eyes.

This is not EEE, just competition. VMWare Esxi could outcompete everyone else out of the blue too by adding 5000 developers to add and test all possible features you might want, like perfect PCIe passthrough, ZFS support in the hypervisor OS, not sucking ass on hardware support, and whatnot.

It is not very smart to just assume everything they do is an EEE. There are some situations where it is plain not possible to do it.

Not really. Off the top of my head, they are not providing anything that is dramatically better from what Linux has already in all their contributions. .Net framework? Powershell? Are these EEE? Are you serious?
From what I've seen so far, their main goal seems to be just migrating their valuable stuff off from Windows that is a sinking ship, so that Microsoft will survive in the "post Windows" world. And this move with Hyper-V still seems to have the same goal.

Freedom of speech only grants me the right of not go to prison for what I said. It does not force people to listen, not protect me from being banned from a private property (like this forum is).

You are right this is not EEE but a different strategy like FFSSM (Fake friends Sneaky snake move):

Do things that make it seem like were friends but actually only do thing because they have to do it.
Like running linux on azure, wow we are best friends. The reality is no one wanted to run microsoft oses so instead of die they had to let people run linux.
Best friend where is fat32/exfat/ntfs source and free use for everyone, oh not a have to do that situation.

[jo-erlend]

Do you understand it? It is not very smart to not question Microsofts moves in the OpenSource fields. MS strategy still shows the EEE pattern. But sure the freedom of speech grants you the right for talking big - go ahead I'm waiting for your wisdom.

Do you think it would be smart for Linux development to be based on blind trust in other developers, or do you think it would be better to verify code contributions and that this is one of the major benefits of open source; that anyone with skills can anonymously prove that some code is bad?

[starshipeleven]

Do you understand it?

I can read the wikipedia or other places that clearly state what EEE is? Yes I can.

1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the "simple" standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.

Now, let's examine the current case.

Embrace: ok, they are adding stuff to Linux, following its standards and whatnot. check.

Extend: umm, Linux has already 2 other native hypervisors that have more or less the same feature set, so it's not like you NEED to use Hyper-V if you want an hypervisor. No " Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product". First strike.
All hypervisors are incompatible with each other (in the sense that the host can only run one bare metal, the others must be under it, with nested virtualization) and VMs need to be converted from one to the other, and this is a technical limitation due to what hypervisors are, not an artificial limitation part of EEE maneuver. So a first interpretation of "creating interoperability problems" is not possible, as an Hypervisor is incompatible with other Hypervisors by definition already, so being incompatible does not hurt other features offering the same functionality. Second strike.
Since all the support for Hyper-V is in their own kernel module(s), they have no way to "create interoperability problems" with KVM or Xen at the kernel level, even if they add incompatible functionality, distros that want to use KVM or Xen will just disable the Hyper-V support on compile time or provide different kernels with differents features (one for KVM/Xen and one for Hyper-V). So the second interpretation of "creating interoperability problems" is not possible, the feature can be switched off on compile time, Microsoft does not control Linux development and must still obey kernel development rules if they want to be merged upstream. Third strike.
There is no valid Extend here, the chain is broken.

Extinguish: The only way to get to this point is competition on hypervisor features and that is completely tangential to Linux. If Hyper-V somehow becomes plain better than KVM and Xen it has done so on its merits alone, not because it has somehow stifled development of KVM/Xen or threw sand in their developer's eyes.

This is not EEE, just competition. VMWare Esxi could outcompete everyone else out of the blue too by adding 5000 developers to add and test all possible features you might want, like perfect PCIe passthrough, ZFS support in the hypervisor OS, not sucking ass on hardware support, and whatnot.

It is not very smart to not question Microsofts moves in the OpenSource fields.

It is not very smart to just assume everything they do is an EEE. There are some situations where it is plain not possible to do it.

MS strategy still shows the EEE pattern.

Not really. Off the top of my head, they are not providing anything that is dramatically better from what Linux has already in all their contributions. .Net framework? Powershell? Are these EEE? Are you serious?
From what I've seen so far, their main goal seems to be just migrating their valuable stuff off from Windows that is a sinking ship, so that Microsoft will survive in the "post Windows" world. And this move with Hyper-V still seems to have the same goal.

But sure the freedom of speech grants you the right for talking big

Freedom of speech only grants me the right of not go to prison for what I said. It does not force people to listen, not protect me from being banned from a private property (like this forum is).

[CochainComplex]

You guys need to understand what EEE is before screaming and tearing your vests like that.

This is just adding a competitor with KVM and Xen for "Linux virtualization host" role.

Do you understand it? It is not very smart to not question Microsofts moves in the OpenSource fields. MS strategy still shows the EEE pattern. But sure the freedom of speech grants you the right for talking big - go ahead I'm waiting for your wisdom.

[starshipeleven]

Do these patches really benefit Linux and the Linux community?

Yes? It can be used as root partition in Hyper-V instead of Windows so Microsoft and anyone using Hyper-V will be more interested in Linux maintenance and wellbeing?

Why would the kernel tree accept them?

Because it's a VM interface, not a shim to run a blob, the "root partition" is still technically a VM, so if they have accepted the modules to make Linux a Hyper-V-aware VM guest, they can accept this too.

Is it so Microsoft invests many man-years of work, then 10 years later we can rip all Microsoft's stuff out again and giggle?

It's all placed behind a compile option so you can disable it and compile your kernel and then giggle alone in your basement at the thought that you have "ripped it out".

[starshipeleven]

+1 Microsoft wants to run Docker and accelerated-qemu for Android/Xamarin. Yet Microsoft does NOT want Linux to run HyperV even if you run it in a Windows VM in KVM. Microsoft wants you to buy Windows Server $$$ for nested virtualization.

Sorry what? Afaik you can enable nested virtualization on Win10 as long as it received the Win10 Anniversary update (an update it received in 2016).
Maybe you have an AMD system? Because they only recently added the ability to run nested virtualization on AMD systems to Win10 and Winserver. https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/...t/ba-p/1434841
And that was a Hyper-V limitation, not a businness decision. Not even Winserver could do nested virtualization on Ryzen/Epyc before this update.

They also have provided an unlimited GUI-less Hyper-V server version since the beginning https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/eval...-v-server-2019