Hubbry Logo
HypervisorHypervisorMain
Open search
Hypervisor
Community hub
Hypervisor
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Hypervisor
Hypervisor
Hypervisor
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A hypervisor, also known as a virtual machine monitor (VMM) or virtualizer, is a type of computer software, firmware or hardware that creates and runs virtual machines. A computer on which a hypervisor runs one or more virtual machines is called a host machine or virtualization server, and each virtual machine is called a guest machine. The hypervisor presents the guest operating systems with a virtual operating platform and manages the execution of the guest operating systems. Unlike an emulator, the guest executes most instructions on the native hardware.[1] Multiple instances of a variety of operating systems may share the virtualized hardware resources: for example, Linux, Windows, and macOS instances can all run on a single physical x86 machine. This contrasts with operating-system–level virtualization, where all instances (usually called containers) must share a single kernel, though the guest operating systems can differ in user space, such as different Linux distributions with the same kernel.

The term hypervisor is a variant of supervisor, a traditional term for the kernel of an operating system: the hypervisor is the supervisor of the supervisors,[2] with hyper- used as a stronger variant of super-.[a] The term dates to circa 1970;[3] IBM coined it for software that ran OS/360 and the 7090 emulator concurrently on the 360/65[4] and later used it for the DIAG handler of CP-67. In the earlier CP/CMS (1967) system, the term Control Program was used instead.

Some literature, especially in microkernel contexts, makes a distinction between hypervisor and virtual machine monitor (VMM). There, both components form the overall virtualization stack of a certain system. Hypervisor refers to kernel-space functionality and VMM to user-space functionality. Specifically in these contexts, a hypervisor is a microkernel implementing virtualization infrastructure that must run in kernel-space for technical reasons, such as Intel VMX. Microkernels implementing virtualization mechanisms are also referred to as microhypervisor.[5][6] Applying this terminology to Linux, KVM is a hypervisor and QEMU or Cloud Hypervisor are VMMs utilizing KVM as hypervisor.[7]

Classification

[edit]
Type-1 and type-2 hypervisors

In his 1973 thesis, "Architectural Principles for Virtual Computer Systems," Robert P. Goldberg classified two types of hypervisor:[1]

Type-1, native or bare-metal hypervisors
These hypervisors run directly on the host's hardware to control the hardware and to manage guest operating systems. For this reason, they are sometimes called bare-metal hypervisors. The first hypervisors, which IBM developed in the 1960s, were native hypervisors.[8] These included the test software SIMMON and the CP/CMS operating system, the predecessor of IBM's VM family of virtual machine operating systems. Examples of Type-1 hypervisor include Hyper-V, Xen and VMware ESXi.
Type-2 or hosted hypervisors
These hypervisors run on a conventional operating system (OS) just as other computer programs do. A virtual machine monitor runs as a process on the host, such as VirtualBox. Type-2 hypervisors abstract guest operating systems from the host operating system, effectively creating an isolated system that can be interacted with by the host. Examples of Type-2 hypervisor include VirtualBox and VMware Workstation.

The distinction between these two types is not always clear. For instance, KVM and bhyve are kernel modules[9] that effectively convert the host operating system to a type-1 hypervisor.[10]

Mainframe origins

[edit]

The first hypervisors providing full virtualization were the test tool SIMMON and the one-off IBM CP-40 research system, which began production use in January 1967 and became the first version of the IBM CP/CMS operating system. CP-40 ran on a S/360-40 modified at the Cambridge Scientific Center to support dynamic address translation, a feature that enabled virtualization. Prior to this time, computer hardware had only been virtualized to the extent to allow multiple user applications to run concurrently, such as in 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 implemented CP-40 (as CP-67) for the IBM System/360-67, the first production computer system capable of full virtualization. IBM 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. (The "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 early 1970s, 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[11]‍—‌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 the virtual memory feature needed for virtualization, but added it in the August 1972 Advanced Function announcement. Virtualization has been featured in all successor systems, such that all modern-day IBM mainframes, including the zSeries line, retain backward 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, 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[citation needed], 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 on IBM Z.

As mentioned above, the VM control program includes a hypervisor-call handler that intercepts DIAG ("Diagnose", opcode x'83') 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 Supervisor Call instruction (SVC), 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).

Operating system support

[edit]

Several factors led to a resurgence around 2005 in the use of virtualization technology among Unix, Linux, and other Unix-like operating systems:[12]

  • 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
  • The ability to overprovision resources, fitting more applications onto a host

Major Unix vendors, including HP, IBM, SGI, and Sun Microsystems, have been selling virtualized hardware since before 2000. These have generally been large, expensive systems (in the multimillion-dollar range at the high end), although virtualization has also been available on some low- and mid-range systems, such as IBM pSeries servers, HP Superdome series machines, and Sun/Oracle SPARC T series CoolThreads servers.

IBM provides virtualization partition technology known as logical partitioning (LPAR) on System/390, zSeries, pSeries and IBM AS/400 systems. For IBM's Power Systems, the POWER Hypervisor (PHYP) is a native (bare-metal) hypervisor in firmware and provides 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 designed 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 multiple parts (model dependent: processors, memory, I/O adapters, blowers, power units, disks, system controllers, etc.)

HPE provides HP Integrity Virtual Machines (Integrity VM) to host multiple operating systems on their Itanium powered Integrity systems. Itanium can run HP-UX, Linux, Windows and OpenVMS, and 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 that allows for multiple 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. HPE 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 latter 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]

Although Solaris has always been the only guest domain OS officially supported by Sun/Oracle on their Logical Domains hypervisor, as of late 2006, Linux (Ubuntu and Gentoo), and FreeBSD have been ported to run on top of the 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.[13] 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.)[14]

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.

x86 systems

[edit]
Main article: x86 virtualization

x86 virtualization was introduced in the 1990s, with its emulation being included in Bochs.[15] Intel and AMD released their first x86 processors with hardware virtualisation in 2005 with Intel VT-x (code-named Vanderpool) and AMD-V (code-named Pacifica).

An alternative approach requires modifying the guest operating system to make a system call to the underlying hypervisor, rather than executing machine I/O instructions that the hypervisor simulates. This is called paravirtualization in Xen, a "hypercall" in Parallels Workstation, and a "DIAGNOSE code" in IBM VM. Some microkernels, such as Mach and L4, are flexible enough to allow paravirtualization of guest operating systems.

Embedded systems

[edit]

Embedded hypervisors, targeting embedded systems and certain real-time operating system (RTOS) environments, are designed with different requirements when compared to desktop and enterprise systems, including robustness, security and real-time capabilities. The resource-constrained nature of multiple 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 and less standardized environments. 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.[16]

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 and MIPS have recently added full virtualization support as an IP option and has included it in their latest high-end processors and architecture versions, such as ARM Cortex-A15 MPCore and ARMv8 EL2.

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.[17]

Security implications

[edit]
Main article: Hyperjacking

The use of hypervisor technology by malware and rootkits installing themselves as a hypervisor below the operating system, known as hyperjacking, 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 anti-malware 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[18]) as well as in the Blue Pill malware package. However, such assertions have been disputed by others who claim that it would be possible to detect the presence of a hypervisor-based rootkit.[19]

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.[20]

Notes

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Hypervisor

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A hypervisor, also known as a virtual machine monitor (VMM), is a software, firmware, or hardware platform that creates, manages, and runs multiple s (VMs) on a single physical host by abstracting and partitioning the underlying hardware resources such as CPU, , storage, and I/O devices. This enables efficient resource sharing among isolated guest operating systems, supporting applications like server consolidation, , and workload isolation without requiring dedicated physical hardware for each. Hypervisors originated in the 1960s with early mainframe systems, such as IBM's CP-40 and CP-67 for the System/360, which introduced to enable and testing of operating systems like OS/360. The concept evolved through the 1970s and 1980s in mainframe environments before resurging in the early 2000s with x86 architectures, driven by open-source projects like (2003) and commercial solutions from , addressing demands for scalable data centers. Today, hypervisors are foundational to modern , powering platforms in enterprise IT, public clouds (e.g., AWS, Azure), and , with ongoing advancements in security, performance, and hardware-assisted features like VT-x and AMD-V. Hypervisors are classified into two primary types based on their deployment model. Type 1 (bare-metal or native) hypervisors run directly on the host hardware without an underlying host operating , offering higher and for production environments; examples include VMware ESXi, , and KVM. Type 2 (hosted) hypervisors operate as applications on top of a conventional host OS, providing greater flexibility and ease of use for development and testing but with added overhead; notable examples are , Oracle , and Parallels Desktop. While some incorporate container-based (e.g., Docker with ), these differ from traditional hypervisors by leveraging the host kernel for lightweight isolation rather than full hardware emulation.

Fundamentals

Definition and Overview

A hypervisor, also known as a virtual machine monitor (VMM), is a software layer that creates, runs, and manages multiple s (VMs) by abstracting and partitioning the physical hardware resources of a host system, including the CPU, , storage, and I/O devices. This abstraction allows each VM to operate as if it has dedicated access to the underlying hardware, enabling the simultaneous execution of multiple isolated operating systems on a single physical machine. The core functions of a hypervisor encompass to assign , , and storage to individual VMs; isolation to ensure that activities in one VM do not affect others; emulation of hardware interfaces to present virtualized devices to guest operating systems; and scheduling to manage the execution of VMs on the physical processor. These functions collectively enable efficient of hardware while maintaining the illusion of independent environments for each VM. Hypervisors provide key benefits such as improved resource utilization by consolidating multiple workloads onto fewer physical servers, easier testing and development through disposable and isolated VM environments, enhanced disaster recovery via VM snapshots and rapid migrations, and greater workload portability that allows applications to move seamlessly between hosts without hardware dependencies. First conceptualized in the for mainframe systems to maximize the use of expensive resources, hypervisors have evolved into a foundational in contemporary centers and infrastructures. In hypervisor design, partitioning refers to the division of physical resources among VMs to prevent interference, while emulation involves simulating hardware components for compatibility with unmodified guest software. Full virtualization achieves this through complete hardware simulation without altering the guest OS, whereas para-virtualization requires minor guest modifications to directly interact with the hypervisor for optimized performance. Representative implementations include for broad virtualization support and for open-source para-virtualization capabilities.

Types and Classification

Hypervisors are primarily classified into two categories based on their execution environment: Type 1 (bare-metal or native) hypervisors, which run directly on the host hardware without an underlying operating system, and Type 2 (hosted) hypervisors, which operate as applications on top of a host operating system. Type 1 hypervisors, such as VMware ESXi, Microsoft Hyper-V, and in paravirtualized mode, provide direct access to hardware resources, enabling efficient management of multiple virtual machines. In contrast, Type 2 hypervisors, including and Oracle VM VirtualBox, rely on the host OS for , simplifying deployment but introducing an additional layer of overhead. This classification originates from the ring-based privilege model defined by Popek and Goldberg in their 1974 paper, where native hypervisors (Type 1) operate at a higher privilege level than the host OS kernel, typically in a hypothetical Ring -1, while hosted hypervisors (Type 2) run within the user mode (Ring 3) of the host OS kernel (Ring 0), necessitating traps to the host for privileged operations. Modern hardware support, such as Intel VT-x or AMD-V, facilitates this by introducing a root mode for the hypervisor, allowing it to intercept and manage sensitive instructions without compromising isolation. Beyond the Type 1 and Type 2 dichotomy, hypervisors can be further categorized by architectural design and virtualization techniques. Architecturally, they range from monolithic designs, where the hypervisor includes all components in a single kernel for simplicity and performance (e.g., VMware ESXi), to microkernel-based designs that modularize services for improved reliability and security (e.g., Microsoft Hyper-V). In terms of virtualization paradigms, full virtualization emulates the entire hardware environment, trapping and emulating all sensitive instructions to run unmodified guest OSes (e.g., VMware with binary translation); paravirtualization requires guest OS modifications to replace sensitive instructions with hypercalls for direct hypervisor communication, reducing overhead (e.g., Xen); and hardware-assisted virtualization leverages CPU extensions to trap sensitive instructions efficiently without emulation (e.g., KVM with VT-x). For resource-constrained environments, embedded hypervisors adapt these paradigms, often as lightweight Type 1 implementations to partition real-time and non-real-time tasks on systems-on-chip, such as Wind River Hypervisor or INTEGRITY by Green Hills Software. The foundational criteria for hypervisor classification, as outlined by Popek and Goldberg, revolve around instruction sensitivity and control methods to ensure efficient . An instruction is deemed sensitive if its depends on the processor's privilege mode (e.g., control-sensitive instructions like mode switches or I/O operations that alter system state) or if it attempts privileged actions in user mode (e.g., -sensitive instructions like halting the processor or modifying page tables). Conversely, innocuous instructions, such as arithmetic operations, logical shifts, or data movements, execute identically regardless of mode and require no or emulation. For a to be virtualizable, all sensitive instructions must trap to the hypervisor (for control), and the hypervisor must precisely emulate their effects without altering guest (for equivalence), while innocuous instructions execute natively in guest mode. Performance trade-offs between hypervisor types stem from their architectural positions: Type 1 hypervisors offer superior and isolation by directly accessing hardware, resulting in lower overhead (typically 1-5% CPU and 5-10% memory) and enhanced , as there is no host OS to compromise. Type 2 hypervisors, however, incur higher overhead due to context switches through the host OS, making them less suitable for high-performance workloads but easier to manage and install on existing systems.

History

Mainframe Origins

The development of hypervisors originated in the mainframe computing era of the 1960s, driven by the need for efficient time-sharing systems on large-scale hardware. In 1964, IBM initiated the CP-40 project as an experimental time-sharing system on a modified IBM System/360 Model 40, marking the first implementation of a hypervisor-like control program that partitioned the physical machine into multiple virtual environments for concurrent user sessions. This effort laid the groundwork for virtualizing mainframe resources, allowing multiple instances of operating systems to run isolated from one another while sharing the underlying hardware. Building on CP-40, the CP-67 system emerged in 1967 specifically for the IBM System/360 Model 67, which introduced dynamic address translation (DAT) hardware support for virtual memory. CP-67 enabled the creation of virtual machines primarily for testing and development of OS/360, supporting up to 32 simultaneous users by emulating the full System/360 instruction set and managing virtual storage to prevent interference between partitions. These early systems drew conceptual inspiration from time-sharing projects like MIT's Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS) and the subsequent Multics, which emphasized resource partitioning and multi-user access to foster interactive computing over batch processing. Key technical innovations included the trap-and-emulate mechanism, where privileged instructions from guest operating systems triggered traps to the control program for emulation, ensuring isolation without requiring guest modifications. By 1972, these research efforts culminated in VM/370, IBM's first production-ready virtual machine system for the System/370 family, which formalized hypervisor functionality for commercial deployment and supported virtual storage management across a range of mainframe models. VM/370 extended CP-67's capabilities, providing robust sharing for development, testing, and production workloads in enterprise environments. The foundational principles of these mainframe hypervisors were rigorously analyzed in Robert P. Goldberg's survey and formal work, which defined essential requirements for a virtual machine monitor (VMM), including the that a conventional processor can serve as a VMM if all sensitive instructions are either privileged or trap to the monitor. This analysis established criteria for equivalence and efficiency, influencing subsequent hypervisor designs by emphasizing isolation, control, and minimal performance overhead.

Evolution to Modern Architectures

The transition of hypervisor technology from mainframe environments to commodity x86 systems in the 1980s and 1990s was marked by significant challenges due to the x86 architecture's lack of native support for virtualization, which required complex binary translation and emulation techniques to handle sensitive instructions and protect the host system. Early efforts influenced Unix-like systems through research aimed at enabling efficient virtualization on personal computers, culminating in VMware's founding in 1998 by Stanford researchers who developed the first x86 virtual machine monitor using dynamic binary translation to overcome these architectural limitations. This period highlighted the need for software-based solutions to virtualize non-virtualizable instructions, paving the way for broader adoption beyond specialized mainframes. The 2000s brought pivotal breakthroughs with the introduction of extensions, addressing x86's inherent deficiencies and shifting hypervisors from emulation-heavy designs to more efficient models. Intel launched VT-x in 2005 on select processors, adding instructions for ring transitions and to support direct execution of guest code. AMD followed with AMD-V (initially SVM) in 2006, providing similar extensions including nested paging to reduce hypervisor overhead from shadow page tables. Concurrently, open-source innovations like the hypervisor, released in 2003 by the , introduced paravirtualization, where guest operating systems are modified for explicit hypervisor cooperation, minimizing emulation needs and enabling near-native performance on unmodified x86 hardware. Key commercial milestones accelerated this evolution, with releasing ESX Server in 2001 as its first bare-metal hypervisor for enterprise x86 servers, focusing on resource partitioning without an underlying host OS. entered the market with Virtual Server 2004, a type-2 hypervisor hosted on Windows, followed by the native type-1 integrated into , leveraging VT-x and AMD-V for improved scalability. In the open-source domain, KVM () was merged into the in 2007, transforming the kernel into a full hypervisor through a loadable module that utilizes hardware extensions for low-overhead . These developments drove architectural shifts from software emulation, which incurred high CPU overhead due to frequent traps and translations, to hardware-assisted that offloads critical operations like interrupt handling and paging to the processor, significantly reducing virtualization overhead in many workloads. This transition also fostered a divide between models, like VMware's ESX lineage emphasizing enterprise features, and open-source alternatives such as and KVM, which promoted community-driven innovation and cost-effective deployment in diverse environments. Up to 2025, recent milestones underscore ongoing refinements, including the Project's 4.19 release in July 2024, which introduced enhancements for architecture support, improved migration capabilities, and general improvements including new security advisories. In March 2025, the Project released version 4.20, featuring additional performance optimizations and support for newer hardware architectures. Broadcom's acquisition of , completed in November 2023 for approximately $69 billion, has reshaped market dynamics, prompting subscription-based licensing shifts that have significantly increased costs for some users (with reported increases ranging from 150% to 1,250%) and accelerated migration to alternatives like KVM, thereby diversifying the hypervisor landscape.

Implementations

x86 and PC Systems

The x86 architecture, widely used in personal computers and servers, presented significant challenges for virtualization in its early days due to its complex instruction set and lack of native support for trapping sensitive operations. Instructions like PUSHF and CLI could alter processor state in ways that violated Popek and Goldberg's virtualization requirements for efficient trapping, necessitating software techniques such as binary translation to emulate or modify guest code on the fly. VMware Workstation, released in 1999, pioneered this approach by dynamically translating non-virtualizable instructions while caching translated code for reuse, enabling full virtualization without hardware assistance. Hardware extensions addressed these limitations starting in the mid-2000s, introducing dedicated modes for virtualization. Intel's VT-x, first implemented in 2005 with certain Pentium 4 processors, added a VMX (Virtual Machine Extensions) mode that uses explicit VM-entry and VM-exit instructions to transition between guest and hypervisor contexts, reducing the need for software traps. Complementing this, Intel's Extended Page Tables (EPT), introduced in 2008 with the Nehalem microarchitecture, provide hardware-assisted nested paging for efficient memory address translation, eliminating much of the overhead from shadow page tables. Similarly, AMD's AMD-V, launched in 2006 with revisions of its K8 processors, offers comparable VM container modes for secure guest execution. AMD followed with Rapid Virtualization Indexing (RVI) in 2007 on Barcelona-based Opteron processors, enabling direct guest-physical to host-physical address mapping akin to EPT. These features, including support for extended page tables and I/O virtualization (VT-d for Intel, IOMMU for AMD), allow hypervisors to offload critical operations to hardware, improving scalability for multiple virtual machines. Prominent hypervisor implementations for x86 systems leverage these extensions for enterprise and desktop environments. VMware vSphere, a Type 1 bare-metal hypervisor, runs directly on hardware and supports large-scale deployments with features like distributed resource scheduling, utilizing VT-x and EPT for near-native performance. Microsoft Hyper-V, integrated into Windows Server since 2008, operates as a Type 1 hypervisor with tight coupling to the Windows kernel, enabling seamless management of virtual machines alongside native workloads via AMD-V or VT-x. On the open-source side, Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM), a Linux kernel module since 2007, pairs with QEMU for device emulation and provides hardware-accelerated virtualization on x86, often used in cloud infrastructures for its flexibility. For desktop use, Oracle VM VirtualBox serves as a Type 2 hosted hypervisor, running atop a host OS like Windows or Linux while exploiting VT-x or AMD-V for guest acceleration. With hardware support, x86 hypervisors achieve low virtualization overhead, typically under 5% for CPU-bound workloads and I/O operations in modern configurations, as traps for privileged instructions are minimized. For instance, EPT and RVI reduce memory management costs by up to 50% compared to software shadow paging, allowing efficient handling of guest page faults without frequent hypervisor intervention. VMware's vMotion exemplifies advanced capabilities, enabling live migration of running virtual machines between hosts with sub-second downtime, preserving memory state and CPU context for high-availability setups. In practice, x86 hypervisors facilitate server consolidation in data centers, where multiple underutilized physical servers are virtualized onto fewer hosts to optimize resource use and reduce costs. Desktop virtualization supports development workflows by isolating testing environments, allowing developers to run diverse OSes on a single PC without hardware partitioning. These applications highlight the synergy between x86 hardware and software, driving widespread adoption in enterprise IT. Following Broadcom's acquisition of in 2023 and subsequent pricing changes in 2024, new Type 1 hypervisors have emerged as alternatives to vSphere, including HPE's VM Essentials released in 2024 and StorMagic's SvHCI in June 2024, supporting x86 hardware with features for simplified management and edge deployments.

Resource Management Best Practices

Effective management of CPU, RAM, storage, and networking resources is critical for achieving optimal performance and efficiency in virtual machines on x86 systems. Best practices across major hypervisors share common principles: right-sizing resources to match specific workload demands, utilizing paravirtualized drivers and adapters to minimize overhead, avoiding excessive overcommitment to prevent contention and degradation, and enabling hardware-assisted virtualization features for improved efficiency.

VMware vSphere/ESXi

Recommendations for VMware vSphere/ESXi include right-sizing vCPUs to workload needs and monitoring CPU ready time to detect overcommitment issues, with reservations or limits applied as necessary; employing memory ballooning and compression while avoiding overcommitment that triggers host swapping; preferring the Paravirtual SCSI (PVSCSI) controller and thick provision eager zeroed disks for high-I/O workloads; and using the VMXNET3 adapter with jumbo frames enabled where suitable for enhanced networking performance.

Microsoft Hyper-V

For Microsoft Hyper-V, best practices involve using compatibility mode for broader guest OS support if required and monitoring logical processor usage; enabling Dynamic Memory for flexible and dynamic RAM allocation; preferring fixed-size VHDX files, pass-through disks for maximum performance, and careful use of write caching; and employing synthetic network adapters with Virtual Machine Queue (VMQ) enabled for improved network throughput.

Oracle VM VirtualBox

Oracle VM VirtualBox recommendations include enabling VT-x/AMD-V and nested paging while allocating CPU cores according to guest requirements; assigning sufficient RAM and enabling PAE/NX for 32-bit guests when needed; using SATA or SAS controllers with fixed-size VDI files for better performance; and preferring bridged or host-only networking adapters over NAT for lower latency. It is essential to continuously monitor performance metrics on both host and guest systems and adjust resource allocations accordingly to maintain optimal operation.

Embedded and Specialized Systems

Embedded hypervisors, predominantly Type 1 bare-metal designs, are tailored for resource-constrained environments such as (IoT) devices and automotive systems, enabling the secure partitioning of multiple operating systems on a single hardware platform. These hypervisors facilitate mixed-criticality systems by providing safety-certified partitions that isolate high-assurance applications, such as safety-critical automotive controls, from less critical ones, ensuring compliance with standards like for . Notable examples include Wind River Hypervisor, which supports real-time in embedded automotive and IoT applications, and INTEGRITY Multivisor from , a Type 1 hypervisor designed for secure hosting of guest operating systems in safety-critical embedded contexts. ARM-based architectures dominate embedded hypervisor implementations due to their prevalence in mobile and low-power devices, with added experimental support for the architecture in version 4.3, released in July 2013, enabling on ARM-based embedded systems. Integration with TrustZone enhances security by creating isolated execution environments, allowing hypervisors to leverage hardware-enforced secure and normal worlds for guest isolation without significant performance overhead. Real-time extensions are common, particularly for real-time operating systems (RTOS) like and ; for instance, Wind River's includes hypervisor capabilities that extend RTOS determinism to virtualized environments, enabling predictable execution in automotive and industrial IoT scenarios. Key features of embedded hypervisors emphasize efficiency and reliability, including minimal footprints often under 1 MB to suit constrained hardware, as seen in microvisor designs that prioritize lightweight operation. Deterministic scheduling ensures bounded response times critical for real-time tasks, while hardware partitioning provides spatial and temporal isolation for security, particularly in where compliance with standards mandates time- and space-partitioned execution to prevent interference between applications. Prominent implementations include the OKL4 microvisor, developed in the by OK Labs and widely adopted in smartphones for secure partitioning of applications and OSes, enabling isolated execution of sensitive workloads like trusted virtual domains. Recent growth in has driven hypervisor adoption for and IoT isolation, with the embedded hypervisor market projected to expand from USD 6.8 billion in 2024 to USD 13.6 billion by 2030, fueled by needs for low-latency, secure at the network edge. Challenges in embedded hypervisors revolve around power efficiency and interrupt latency, as virtualization overhead can increase energy consumption and delay real-time responses in battery-powered or timing-sensitive systems. Solutions include para-virtualized drivers, which modify guest OSes to communicate directly with the hypervisor, reducing trap-and-emulate overhead and improving interrupt handling efficiency in real-time embedded setups.

Operating System Integration

Guest OS Support

Hypervisors support guest operating systems through two primary virtualization approaches: full virtualization, which enables unmodified guest OSes to run without alterations by emulating hardware and leveraging CPU assists like VT-x or AMD-V, and paravirtualization, which requires guest OS modifications or drivers to communicate directly with the hypervisor for improved performance. In full virtualization, common for proprietary OSes like or distributions, the hypervisor traps and emulates sensitive instructions, allowing broad compatibility without guest awareness of the . Paravirtualization, exemplified by Xen's PV mode, uses specialized drivers to replace hypercalls, optimizing I/O and memory operations for open-source guests like modified kernels, though it demands guest-side adaptations. Major hypervisors exhibit broad guest OS compatibility, encompassing editions (e.g., 2025, 2022, 2019), various distributions (e.g., , , , ), BSD variants, and even legacy mainframe systems like under . For cross-architecture support, tools like enable emulation of disparate instruction sets, such as running -based guests on x86 hosts or vice versa, facilitating testing and migration across platforms. and KVM similarly accommodate a wide array of x86 and guests, including and , ensuring versatility in enterprise deployments. Key mechanisms enhance guest OS accommodation, including for legacy or unmodified OSes, where the hypervisor dynamically rewrites sensitive guest instructions to safe equivalents, as seen in early implementations for x86 full virtualization. Enlightenments, such as Hyper-V's Linux Integration Services (LIS), provide paravirtualized drivers built into modern kernels to optimize time synchronization, heartbeat monitoring, and synthetic device access, reducing emulation overhead. Virtio standards, widely adopted in KVM and , standardize paravirtualized I/O devices like block storage and networking, allowing guests to bypass full emulation for near-native through a common interface. Despite these capabilities, limitations persist, particularly with (ISA) mismatches, where running x86-only guests on hypervisors demands full emulation via , incurring significant CPU overhead due to dynamic of incompatible instructions. Licensing constraints further restrict proprietary OSes; for instance, Standard permits only two licensed VMs per host under , requiring additional Datacenter edition licenses for unlimited instances, while products enforce strict partitioning rules in virtual environments to prevent over-licensing. To ensure reliable integration, hypervisors incorporate testing and processes, such as Tools, which install guest additions for enhanced graphics, file sharing, and quiescing during backups, verified against specific OS versions for seamless operation. Similarly, Hyper-V's LIS undergoes with distributions like , confirming compatibility for features like dynamic memory and shutdown coordination, with providing updated packages for older kernels to maintain support. These tools and certifications mitigate compatibility issues, enabling production-grade guest deployments across diverse OS ecosystems.

Host Interactions and Compatibility

Type 1 hypervisors, also known as bare-metal hypervisors, interact directly with the host hardware, bypassing any underlying operating system to eliminate overhead and enable efficient resource management. This direct control allows the hypervisor to handle CPU scheduling, memory allocation, and I/O operations natively, resulting in lower latency and higher performance for virtualized workloads. Management of Type 1 hypervisors typically occurs through dedicated consoles, such as VMware vCenter Server, which provides a centralized platform for configuring hosts, provisioning virtual machines, and monitoring cluster-wide operations. Type 2 hypervisors, in contrast, operate as user-space applications atop a host operating system like or Windows, relying on the host OS for and resource sharing. This hosted model introduces some performance overhead due to context switching with the host kernel but facilitates easier integration with host tools and extensions. For example, on Windows, compatibility with host features is evident in setups like the 2 (WSL2), which utilizes lightweight components to run distributions seamlessly alongside Windows applications, though it may conflict with other Type 2 tools like or when is enabled. Interactions between hypervisors and the host often involve API-driven mechanisms for tasks like provisioning and real-time monitoring. Libvirt, a widely used open-source library, exposes APIs for managing KVM environments, allowing administrators to script VM creation, migration, and status queries through tools like virsh or integrated platforms. Resource contention on the host is addressed via techniques such as CPU pinning, which dedicates specific physical cores to virtual machines to minimize interference from host processes, and memory ballooning, where the hypervisor inflates or deflates a balloon device in guest memory to reclaim unused pages dynamically. The KVM hypervisor inherently supports overcommitment of both CPU and memory, enabling more virtual resources to be allocated than physically available while relying on host scheduling to balance loads. Compatibility challenges in host interactions frequently stem from driver conflicts, where incompatible host or guest drivers disrupt passthrough or emulation. Nested virtualization, which permits running one hypervisor within another, adds complexity; for instance, enabling inside a virtual machine requires explicit configuration of extensions like VT-x or AMD-V, but can lead to stability issues if not aligned with host firmware. Updates to underlying systems, such as recent enhancements for KVM, have improved overall stability by refining device emulation and memory handling, though they occasionally introduce temporary incompatibilities that necessitate host reboots or module tweaks. To enhance portability and interoperability, standards like the (OVF) define a package for describing and distributing virtual machines across hypervisors, encapsulating configuration, disk images, and metadata in a vendor-neutral way. tools further aid host compatibility in hybrid environments; for example, integrates with hypervisors via KubeVirt, allowing unified management of virtual machines and containers on shared host infrastructure.

Security Considerations

Features and Benefits

Hypervisors deliver robust security through isolation principles that partition resources among virtual machines (VMs), enabling secure multi-tenancy on shared hardware. partitioning, such as Intel's Extended Page Tables (EPT) on x86 architectures, allows the hypervisor to independently map each VM's physical addresses to host , preventing unauthorized access or interference between guests. Similarly, CPU scheduling mechanisms assign virtual CPUs (vCPUs) to physical cores in a controlled manner, mitigating cross-VM interference like timing-based side-channel attacks by ensuring workloads do not contend excessively for shared resources. These features collectively support multi-tenancy by allowing multiple untrusted tenants to coexist on the same physical server without compromising each other's confidentiality or integrity. Key protection features further enhance hypervisor security, including secure boot for VMs and hardware-based attestation. Secure boot verifies the authenticity of VM firmware, bootloaders, and operating systems at startup, blocking from loading; for instance, Microsoft Hyper-V Generation 2 VMs enforce this to prevent rootkits or tampered kernels. Attestation mechanisms, such as (TXT), enable remote verification of the platform's boot process and hypervisor state using trusted platform modules (TPMs). Encrypted memory technologies provide additional safeguards: AMD's Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV), introduced in 2016, assigns unique encryption keys per VM to protect memory contents from hypervisor or host access, while Intel's Trust Domain Extensions (TDX), released in 2021, extends this to full VM isolation with integrity-protected encryption. These capabilities yield significant benefits, including a reduced where breaches are contained within individual VMs, limiting propagation to the host or other guests and acting as an effective sandbox. Patching becomes more efficient, as hypervisors support of VMs to alternate hosts during updates, avoiding downtime for critical workloads. Isolation also aids , such as PCI-DSS requirements for segmenting cardholder data environments from other systems. Advanced features like maintain VM state encryption throughout execution, denying even privileged hypervisor access to sensitive data in use, while role-based access controls (RBAC) enforce granular permissions for hypervisor management, restricting administrative actions to authorized roles only. Studies demonstrate that such techniques can reduce the attack surface by up to 90%, substantially curbing risks of lateral movement in multi-tenant environments.

Vulnerabilities and Mitigations

Hypervisors are susceptible to escape attacks, where malicious code within a (VM) exploits flaws to access the host system or other VMs, potentially leading to full compromise. A prominent example is the vulnerability (CVE-2015-3456), a in the floppy disk controller emulation that allows a privileged guest user to crash the VM or execute arbitrary code on the host, affecting hypervisors like KVM, , and . Side-channel attacks, such as Spectre and Meltdown disclosed in 2018, further undermine VM isolation by exploiting in CPUs to leak sensitive data across boundaries, enabling guests to read hypervisor memory or data from other VMs. Hypervisor-specific risks often involve through mishandled extensions, such as VT-x. For instance, flaws in VT-x implementation can allow guests to manipulate hypervisor state, leading to unauthorized access; recent cases include CVE-2024-37085 in VMware ESXi, where attackers escalate privileges via bypass to gain administrative control over the hypervisor. In , denial-of-service (DoS) vulnerabilities targeting ARM guests, such as those in page refcounting (e.g., XSA-473 from 2025), enable malicious guests to crash the hypervisor by exhausting resources without proper alignment checks. Mitigations for these vulnerabilities include applying firmware and microcode updates to address side-channel issues, as seen in patches for Spectre variant CVE-2017-5715 that prevent guest-to-hypervisor data leaks in . Hypercall validation in hypervisors like and KVM ensures guest requests are sanitized to block escalation attempts, while tools such as sVirt integrate SELinux with libvirt to enforce mandatory access controls, labeling VM resources to isolate them from the host and prevent escapes in KVM environments. complements this by confining processes through profiles that restrict file and network access, mitigating risks in deployments. Best practices emphasize least privilege principles, where hypervisors run with minimal permissions and VMs are confined to necessary resources, alongside regular auditing and anomaly monitoring to detect unusual behavior. NIST Special Publication 800-125A provides guidelines for secure hypervisor deployment, recommending configuration hardening like disabling unused features and enabling integrity checks to reduce attack surfaces. Emerging threats in 2025 involve AI-driven attacks that optimize exploitation of VM scheduling for side-channel leaks, where models predict and manipulate to amplify , as noted in reports on AI-enhanced cyber operations. Supply chain compromises, akin to the 2020 incident, pose risks to virtualization through tainted updates or build pipelines, with 2024-2025 analyses showing increased targeting of open-source hypervisor components like , potentially introducing backdoors during deployment.

Modern Applications

Cloud and Data Center Deployment

In large-scale cloud and data center environments, hypervisors play a pivotal role in enabling efficient resource utilization, isolation, and orchestration of virtual machines (VMs) across thousands of physical servers. Major cloud providers leverage specialized hypervisor implementations to optimize performance and security at scale. For instance, (AWS) introduced the Nitro System in 2017, featuring a custom Type 1 hypervisor that is lightweight and firmware-like, focusing solely on memory and CPU allocation while offloading networking, storage, and functions to dedicated hardware components such as Nitro Cards and the Nitro Security Chip. This design delivers near-bare-metal performance and enhances isolation by minimizing the hypervisor's attack surface. Similarly, employs as its core hypervisor for VM deployment, supporting migration of on-premises VMs to Azure through tools like Azure Migrate, which facilitates seamless integration and scalability in hybrid setups. Google, on the other hand, uses gVisor, an open-source sandboxed container runtime introduced in 2018, which functions as a user-space kernel hypervisor to isolate containers from the host kernel, integrating with Docker and for secure, portable workloads in Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE). Hardware offloading, exemplified by AWS SmartNICs (also known as Data Processing Units or DPUs), further reduces CPU overhead by handling virtualization tasks like networking and storage directly on the NIC, improving efficiency in hyperscale data centers. Data centers rely on hypervisors for server consolidation, achieving VM densities such as 10:1 or higher—where a single physical server hosts 10 or more VMs—thereby reducing hardware footprint and operational costs while maximizing resource utilization. (HA) is ensured through clustering mechanisms, where hypervisors like enable clustering to automatically restart VMs on healthy nodes during host failures, minimizing to seconds. further supports zero- operations by transparently moving running VMs between hosts without interrupting services, a feature integral to and other type 1 hypervisors for maintenance and load balancing in clustered environments. Orchestration platforms integrate hypervisors to automate provisioning and management at scale. , for example, uses hypervisors like KVM for compute nodes, enabling dynamic VM scaling and integration with for hybrid container-VM workflows. KubeVirt extends to manage VMs as native resources, allowing orchestration of both VMs and containers via a unified , with support for and storage integration in production environments. This facilitates automated provisioning, such as rapid VM deployment in response to demand spikes, streamlining operations in multi-tenant data centers. Scalability in hypervisor deployments faces challenges in network and . Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV) addresses network bottlenecks by allowing direct VM access to physical NICs, bypassing the hypervisor for higher throughput and lower latency in high-density setups, though it requires compatible hardware and careful configuration to avoid resource contention. For storage, integrating distributed systems like Ceph with VMs enables scalable, resilient block and , but introduces challenges such as performance tuning for I/O-intensive workloads and managing cluster expansion without downtime. The market, closely tied to hypervisor deployments, is projected to grow from USD 2.4 billion in 2023 to USD 9.7 billion by 2033 at a CAGR of 15%, driven by demand for secure scaling in cloud environments. A prominent is 's dominance in enterprise centers, where its vSphere hypervisor has powered consolidation and HA for decades, supporting over 500,000 customers globally. However, following Broadcom's 2023 acquisition of for $61 billion, pricing changes—including a shift to subscription-only licensing, minimum 72-core purchases (up from 16), and increases of 150-1,250% for some renewals—have prompted many organizations to explore alternatives like open-source hypervisors or cloud-native shifts. In recent years, hypervisors have increasingly incorporated (AI) and (ML) for enhanced resource management and . For instance, AI-driven frameworks in VMware Horizon Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) enable predictive scaling of GPU resources for intensive workloads in hybrid cloud environments, optimizing allocation based on usage patterns and reducing overhead by up to 30% in tested scenarios. Similarly, broader trends in hypervisor leverage AI for predictive autoscaling, allowing dynamic adjustment of virtual machine (VM) resources to handle fluctuating demands in data centers and edge setups, improving efficiency without manual intervention. The integration of hypervisors with technologies represents a hybrid approach to , combining the isolation of VMs with the lightweight performance of . Containers, an open-source project initiated in 2017, runs within lightweight VMs powered by hypervisors such as /KVM or , providing stronger workload isolation while maintaining compatibility with orchestration tools like . This contrasts with pure OS-level like Docker, as adds a hardware-virtualized layer for enhanced security against container escapes, making it suitable for multi-tenant environments. At the edge and in (IoT) deployments, hypervisors are adapting to resource-constrained devices for . The hypervisor supports hardware, enabling on low-power ARM-based boards for edge applications, with ongoing community efforts to expand its use in industrial and IoT scenarios as of 2025. Confidential edge computing further advances this by incorporating trusted execution environments (TEEs) into hypervisors, protecting data processing from compromised hosts or networks; for example, solutions like Metalvisor optimize secure, cloud-native workloads at the edge while minimizing size, weight, power, and cost (SWaP-C). Key innovations in hypervisor design include , which compile applications directly with minimal OS components to create specialized, efficient VMs. Unikraft, an open-source unikernel development kit, facilitates the building of such lightweight VMs that boot in milliseconds and consume fewer resources than traditional guests, ideal for serverless and edge use cases. GPU virtualization has also evolved, with NVIDIA's vGPU software enabling time-sharing of physical GPUs across multiple VMs on supported hypervisors like , Citrix Hypervisor, and KVM, accelerating graphics and AI workloads in virtualized settings. Market dynamics in 2025 show a surge in open-source hypervisors as alternatives to proprietary solutions like , driven by cost concerns and licensing changes. Proxmox VE and , both based on KVM and respectively, have gained traction for their free core offerings, integrated management interfaces, and support for hybrid environments, with Proxmox particularly noted for its ease in small-to-medium deployments. In embedded systems, hypervisors are expanding into autonomous vehicles, where the automotive hypervisor market is projected to grow significantly due to needs for consolidating safety-critical and systems on shared hardware. Solutions like the Hypervisor enable real-time partitioning for mixed-criticality applications in vehicles, enhancing reliability and compliance with standards like ISO 26262.

References

  1. https://www.sei.cmu.edu/blog/virtualization-via-virtual-machines/
  2. https://www.nist.gov/publications/security-recommendations-hypervisor-deployment-servers
  3. https://pg-p.ctme.caltech.edu/blog/cloud-computing/all-about-virtualization-in-cloud-computing
  4. https://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/bb/cloud/virtualization.pptx
  5. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/virtualization
  6. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1640&context=etd
  7. https://www.utdallas.edu/~sridhar/ios/ref/virt_book.pdf
  8. https://lass.cs.umass.edu/papers/pdf/middleware16-CVM.pdf
  9. https://moodle.linnbenton.edu/mod/url/view.php?id=324430&redirect=1
  10. https://people.computing.clemson.edu/~jmarty/courses/VirtualBox/IntroToVirtualMachines.html
  11. http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/spring2019/cmsc412/Slides/Set19.pdf
  12. https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/hypervisor
  13. https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/vmm-intro.pdf
  14. https://lass.cs.umass.edu/~shenoy/courses/spring22/lectures/Lec08_notes
  15. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/legacy/sp/nistspecialpublication800-125.pdf
  16. https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/bitstreams/a4534ebd-845b-4e1a-8bab-3b3c2dc38a47/download
  17. https://www.cs.wmich.edu/~alfuqaha/Spring13/cs5550/lectures/virtualization.pdf
  18. https://faculty.cc.gatech.edu/~ada/papers/hpcvirt07.pdf
  19. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall19/cos318/lectures/19.VirtualMachines.pdf
  20. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/hypervisor
  21. https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/feature/The-history-of-virtualization-and-its-mark-on-data-center-management
  22. https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs6411/2018sp/papers/popek-goldberg.pdf
  23. https://redmondmag.com/articles/2012/03/01/virtualization-classes-in-cloud-computing.aspx
  24. https://www.windriver.com/solutions/learning/hypervisor
  25. https://www.embedded.com/embedded-hypervisors/
  26. https://read.seas.harvard.edu/cs161/2018/lectures/lecture25/
  27. https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/type-1-vs-type-2-hypervisor-what-is-the-difference/
  28. https://serverfault.com/questions/135431/is-virtual-machine-slower-than-the-underlying-physical-machine
  29. https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247316.pdf
  30. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1147/sj.112.0099
  31. https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3365199
  32. https://www.vm.ibm.com/history/50th/vm370ori.pdf
  33. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274531055_Bringing_Virtualization_to_the_x86_Architecture_with_the_Original_VMware_Workstation
  34. https://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/~mythili/virtcc/papers/vmware.pdf
  35. https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/tip/Understand-hardware-support-for-virtualization
  36. https://blog.quarkslab.com/a-virtual-journey-from-hardware-virtualization-to-hyper-vs-virtual-trust-levels.html
  37. https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/papers/2003-xensosp.pdf
  38. https://williamlam.com/2023/04/esx-server-1-0-trip-down-memory-lane.html
  39. https://www.serverwatch.com/guides/hyper-v-struts-its-stuff/
  40. https://www.kernel.org/doc/ols/2007/ols2007v1-pages-225-230.pdf
  41. https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/hwsw.pdf
  42. https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~jfisherogden/hardwareVirt.pdf
  43. https://xenproject.org/blog/xen-project-announces-performance-and-security-advancements-with-release-of-4-19/
  44. https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen_Project_4.20_Release_Notes
  45. https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/broadcom-closes-69-bln-vmware-deal-after-china-approval-2023-11-22/
  46. https://dxc.com/us/en/insights/growth-drivers/vmware-licensing-changes-and-the-road-ahead
  47. https://www.ahead.com/resources/breaking-down-the-impacts-of-broadcoms-vmware-acquisition/
  48. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2382553.2382554
  49. https://www.vmware.com/pdf/Perf_ESX_Intel-EPT-eval.pdf
  50. https://www.vmware.com/products/cloud-infrastructure/vsphere
  51. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/overview
  52. https://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page
  53. https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch01.html
  54. https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-cis/vsphere/vsphere/8-0/vcenter-and-host-management-8-0/migrating-virtual-machines-host-management/migration-with-vmotion-host-management.html
  55. https://www.vmware.com/topics/hypervisor
  56. https://dcig.com/2025/08/avalanche-hypervisor-changes-vsphere-alternatives/
  57. https://blocksandfiles.com/2025/11/13/the-great-virtualization-reset-why-hpe-has-the-only-real-plan-b/
  58. https://www.ghs.com/products.html
  59. https://www.fruct.org/files/publications/volume-23/fruct23/Luc.pdf
  60. https://www.trustkernel.com/uploads/pubs/vtz.pdf
  61. https://www.windriver.com/blog/Switching-Gears-Moving-Systems-to-VxWorks-from-QNX
  62. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221164012_The_OKL4_Microvisor_Convergence_Point_of_Microkernels_and_Hypervisors_ABSTRACT
  63. https://static.lwn.net/lwn/lwn/images/conf/rtlws11/papers/proc/p05.pdf
  64. https://www.marketgrowthreports.com/market-reports/embedded-hypervisor-market-114175
  65. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2046582.2046592
  66. https://faculty.eng.fau.edu/ankur/files/2017/09/Virtualization-Techniques-for-Mobile-Devices_IRECOS-Jaramillo-07102013.pdf
  67. https://www.strategicmarketresearch.com/market-report/embedded-hypervisor-market
  68. https://retis.santannapisa.it/~a.biondi/papers/RTAS21-IOvirt.pdf
  69. https://www.cse.wustl.edu/~lu/papers/jsa14-virtualization.pdf
  70. https://csrc.nist.gov/files/pubs/shared/itlb/itlbul2011-04.pdf
  71. https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19044-01/sol.containers/819-2450/gexwg/index.html
  72. https://serverfault.com/questions/222010/difference-between-xen-pv-xen-kvm-and-hvm
  73. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/supported-windows-guest-operating-systems-for-hyper-v-on-windows
  74. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/supported-linux-and-freebsd-virtual-machines-for-hyper-v-on-windows
  75. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zvm/7.2.0?topic=information-operating-systems-supported-as-guests-zvm
  76. https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/target-arm.html
  77. https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/vmware-cis/hcx/vmware-hcx/4-7/vmware-hcx-user-guide-4-7/migrating-virtual-machines-with-vmware-hcx/understanding-vmware-hcx-os-assisted-migration/supported-guest-operating-systems.html
  78. https://documentation.suse.com/sles/15-SP7/html/SLES-all/cha-virt-support.html
  79. https://docs.saferwall.com/blog/virtualization-internals-part-2-vmware-and-virtualization-using-binary-translation/
  80. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/integration-services
  81. https://libvirt.org/news.html
  82. https://arxiv.org/html/2501.03427v1
  83. https://projectrunspace.org/understanding-the-two-virtual-machine-licenses-with-windows-server-standard/
  84. https://revealcompliance.com/oracle-database-virtual-licensing/
  85. https://www.vmware.com/docs/vmware-product-guide-april-2024
  86. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/6/html/virtualization_host_configuration_and_guest_installation_guide/chap-rhel_virt_on_other_platforms-hyperv
  87. https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/virtualization/kvm-vs-vmware-comparison
  88. https://www.vmware.com/content/dam/digitalmarketing/vmware/en/pdf/products/vmware-sap-solutions-guide.pdf
  89. https://www.vmware.com/content/dam/digitalmarketing/vmware/en/pdf/vcat/vmware-vcenter-server-use-cases-architectures.pdf
  90. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/faq
  91. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_openstack_platform/17.0/html/configuration_reference/nova_4
  92. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/virtualization_deployment_and_administration_guide/chap-overcommitting_with_kvm
  93. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/6/pdf/virtualization_administration_guide/virtualization-administration-guide.pdf
  94. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/nested-virtualization
  95. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/9/html-single/9.6_release_notes/index
  96. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity14/sec14-paper-varadarajan.pdf
  97. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/generation-2-virtual-machine-security-features
  98. https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/txt-enabling-guide.pdf
  99. https://www.amd.com/en/developer/sev.html
  100. https://confidentialcomputing.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2023/03/Common-Terminology-for-Confidential-Computing.pdf
  101. https://www.ijfmr.com/papers/2024/6/29765.pdf
  102. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-3456
  103. https://blog.qualys.com/vulnerabilities-threat-research/2015/05/13/venom-hypervisor-vulnerability
  104. https://meltdownattack.com/
  105. https://www.qemu.org/2018/01/04/spectre/
  106. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-37085
  107. https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-473.html
  108. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/virtualization_security_guide/chap-virtualization_security_guide-svirt
  109. https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/compute/hardening-the-virtualization-layers.html
  110. https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/125/a/final
  111. https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/threat-landscape/trend-micro-state-of-ai-security-report-1h-2025
  112. https://ntsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/The-2025-Software-Supply-Chain-Security-Report-RL-compressed.pdf
  113. https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/nitro/
  114. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/whitepapers/latest/security-design-of-aws-nitro-system/the-components-of-the-nitro-system.html
  115. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/whitepapers/latest/security-design-of-aws-nitro-system/security-design-of-aws-nitro-system.html
  116. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/migrate/tutorial-migrate-hyper-v
  117. https://gvisor.dev/
  118. https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/identity-security/open-sourcing-gvisor-a-sandboxed-container-runtime
  119. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/hpc/bare-metal-performance-with-the-aws-nitro-system/
  120. https://siliconangle.com/2021/06/18/aws-secret-weapon-revolutionizing-computing/
  121. https://cloudzy.com/blog/what-is-server-virtualization/
  122. https://www.nakivo.com/blog/hyper-v-high-availability-works/
  123. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/virtualization/hyper-v/manage/live-migration-overview
  124. https://superuser.openinfra.org/articles/run-your-kubernetes-cluster-on-openstack-in-production/
  125. https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/virtualization/what-is-kubevirt
  126. https://blog-us.kioxia.com/post/2023/03/31/why-sr-iov-is-the-solution-to-help-efficiently-scale-your-data-center
  127. https://www.sardinasystems.com/news/addressing-concerns-how-to-solve-5-common-ceph-storage-issues/
  128. https://market.us/report/virtualization-security-market/
  129. https://blogs.vmware.com/cloud-foundation/2024/01/22/vmware-end-of-availability-of-perpetual-licensing-and-saas-services/
  130. https://www.crn.com/news/data-center/2025/broadcom-vmware-ups-minimum-core-purchase-substantially-levies-late-renewal-penalties
  131. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393254997_AI-Optimized_VMware_Horizon_VDI_Predictive_Resource_Scaling_for_GPU-Intensive_Workloads_in_Hybrid_Cloud_Environments
  132. https://www.serverion.com/uncategorized/top-5-hypervisor-trends-for-2025/
  133. https://katacontainers.io/
  134. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/containers/enhancing-kubernetes-workload-isolation-and-security-using-kata-containers/
  135. https://www.linux.com/news/xen-on-raspberry-pi-4-adventures/
  136. https://confidentialcomputing.io/2025/07/08/welcome-mainsail-industries-as-a-new-confidential-computing-consortium-start-up-member/
  137. https://blog.kubesimplify.com/introducing-unikraft-lightweight-virtualization-using-unikernels
  138. https://docs.nvidia.com/vgpu/index.html
  139. https://cloudchipr.com/blog/vmware-alternatives
  140. https://www.giiresearch.com/report/tbrc1779520-automotive-hypervisor-global-market-report.html
  141. https://blackberry.qnx.com/en/ultimate-guides/automotive-hypervisor/automotive-virtualization
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.