Jaeseong Im
ABSTRACT
The level of demand for bare-metal cloud services has increased rapidly because such services are cost-effective for several types of workloads, and some cloud clients prefer a single-tenant environment due to the lower security vulnerability of such enviornments. However, as the bare-metal cloud does not utilize a virtualization layer, it cannot use live migration. Thus, there is a lack of manageability with the bare-metal cloud. Live migration support can improve the manageability of bare-metal cloud services significantly.
This paper suggests an on-demand virtualization technique to improve the manageability of bare-metal cloud services. A thin virtualization layer is inserted into the bare-metal cloud when live migration is requested. After the completion of the live migration process, the thin virtualization layer is removed from the host. We modified BitVisor [19] to implement on-demand virtualization and live migration on the x86 architecture.
The elapsed time of on-demand virtualization was negligible. It takes about 20 ms to insert the virtualization layer and 30 ms to remove the one. After removing the virtualization layer, the host machine works with bare-metal performance.
- 2009. Redis. (2009). Retrieved August 7, 2017 from https://redis.io/Google Scholar
- 2011. AMD SB700 series developer guide. (2011). Retrieved August 15, 2017 from http://support.amd.com/TechDocs/43366.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Kursad Albayraktaroglu, Aamer Jaleel, Xue Wu, Manoj Franklin, Bruce Jacob, Chau-Wen Tseng, and Donald Yeung. 2005. BioBench: A benchmark suite of bioinformatics applications. In IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software. IEEE, Austin, TX, USA, 2--9.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andreas Berl, Erol Gelenbe, Marco D. Girolamo, Giovanni Giuliani, Hermann D. Meer, Minh Q. Dang, and Kostas Pentikousis. 2010. Energy-Efficient Cloud Computing. Comput. J. 53, 7 (1 Sept. 2010), 1045--1051. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jui-Hao Chiang, Maohua Lu, and Tzi-cker Chiueh. 2011. Boot-strapped Migration for Linux OS. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 209--212. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yeongpil Cho, Junbum Shin, Donghyun Kwon, MyungJoo Ham, Yuna Kim, and Yunheung Paek. 2016. Hardware-assisted On-demand Hypervisor Activation for Efficient Security Critical Code Execution on Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 2016 USENIX Conference on Usenix Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC '16). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 565--578. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3026959.3027011Google Scholar
- Wes Felter, Alexandre Ferreira, Ram Rajamony, and Juan Rubio. 2015. An updated performance comparison of virtual machines and Linux containers. In 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS). 171--172. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Takaaki Fukai, Yushi Omote, Takahiro Shinagawa, and Kazuhiko Kato. 2015. OS-Independent Live Migration Scheme for Bare-Metal Clouds. In 2015 IEEE/ACM 8th International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing (UCC). 80--89. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert P. Goldberg. 1974. Survey of virtual machine research. Computer 7, 6 (June 1974), 34--45. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jinhua Hu, Jianhua Gu, Guofei Sun, and Tianhai Zhao. 2010. A Scheduling Strategy on Load Balancing of Virtual Machine Resources in Cloud Computing Environment. In Proceedings of the 2010 3rd International Symposium on Parallel Architectures, Algorithms and Programming (PAAP '10). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 89--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Asim Kadav and Michael M. Swift. 2009. Live Migration of Direct-access Devices. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 43, 3 (July 2009), 95--104. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thawan Kooburat and Michael Swift. 2011. The Best of Both Worlds with On-demand Virtualization. In Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Conference on Hot Topics in Operating Systems (HotOS'13). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 4--4. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1991596.1991602Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael A Kozuch, Michael Kaminsky, and Michael P Ryan. 2009. Migration without virtualization. In 12th Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. IEEE, Monte VeritÃĂ, Switzerland.Google Scholar
- David E Lowell, Yasushi Saito, and Eileen J Samberg. 2004. Devirtualizable virtual machines enabling general, single-node, online maintenance. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Architectural support for programming languages and operating systems. ACM, Boston, MA, USA, 211--223.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mohamed A. Morsy, John Grundy, and Ingo Müller. 2010. An Analysis of the Cloud Computing Security Problem. In In Proceedings of APSEC 2010 Cloud Workshop. https://doi.org/10.1.1.185.438Google Scholar
- Tsutomu Nomoto, Yoshihiro Oyama, Hideki Eiraku, Takahiro Shinagawa, and Kazuhiko Kato. 2010. Using a hypervisor to migrate running operating systems to secure. In Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), 2010 IEEE 34th Annual. IEEE, Seoul, South Korea, 37--46.Google Scholar
- Yushi Omote, Takahiro Shinagawa, and Kazuhiko Kato. 2015. Improving agility and elasticity in bare-metal clouds. In Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 145--159.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael L Powell and Barton P Miller. 1983. Process migration in DEMOS/MP. In Proceedings of the ninth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 110--119.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Takahiro Shinagawa, Hideki Eiraku, Kouichi Tanimoto, Kazumasa Omote, Shoichi Hasegawa, Takashi Horie, Manabu Hirano, Kenichi Kourai, Yoshihiro Oyama, Eiji Kawai, et al. 2009. Bitvisor: a thin hypervisor for enforcing i/o device security. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS international conference on Virtual execution environments. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 121--130.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Edwin Zhai, Gregory D Cummings, and Yaozu Dong. 2008. Live migration with pass-through device for linux vm. In The 2008 Ottawa Linux Symposium. ACM, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 261--268.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- On-demand virtualization for live migration in bare metal cloud
Recommendations
Directvisor: virtualization for bare-metal cloud
VEE '20: Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual Execution EnvironmentsBare-metal cloud platforms allow customers to rent remote physical servers and install their preferred operating systems and software to make the best of servers' raw hardware capabilities. However, this quest for bare-metal performance compromises ...
OS-independent live migration scheme for bare-metal clouds
UCC '15: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Utility and Cloud ComputingBare-metal clouds are an emerging and attractive platform for cloud users who demand extreme computer performance. Bare-metal clouds lease physical machines rather than virtual machines, eliminating a virtualization overhead and providing maximum ...
Traffic-sensitive live migration of virtual machines
CCGRID '15: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud, and Grid ComputingIn this paper we address the problem of network contention between the migration traffic and the Virtual Machine (VM) application traffic for the live migration of co-located Virtual Machines. When VMs are migrated with pre-copy, they run at the source ...
Comments