zlacker

>>makebo+(OP)
Tangential question: why does it normally take so long to start traditional VMs in the first place? At least on Windows, if you start a traditional VM, it takes several seconds for it to start running anything.

Edit: when I say anything, I'm not talking user programs. I mean as in, before even the first instruction of the firmware -- before even the virtual disk file is zeroed out, in cases where it needs to be. You literally can't pause the VM during this interval because the window hasn't even popped up yet, and even when it has, you still can't for a while because it literally hasn't started running anything. So the kernel and even firmware initialization slowness are entirely irrelevant to my question.

Why is that?

>>datafl+0h
I mean it is basically booting a computer from scratch, kind of makes sense. You have to allocate memory, start virtual CPUs, initialize devices, run BIOS/UEFI checks, perform hardware enumeration, all that jazz while emulating all of it, which tends to be slower than "real" implementations. I guess there is a bunch of processes for security as well, like wiping like zeroing pages and similar things that takes additional time.

If I let a VM use most of my hardware, it takes a few seconds from start to login prompt, which is the same time it takes for my Arch desktop to boot from pressing the button to seeing the login prompt.

>>diggan+8m
> You have to allocate memory, start virtual CPUs, initialize devices, run BIOS/UEFI checks, perform hardware enumeration, all that jazz while emulating all of it, which tends to be slower than "real" implementations.

That's not what I'm asking.

I'm saying it takes a long time for it to even execute a single instruction, in the BIOS itself. Even for the window to pop up, before you can even pause the VM (because it hasn't even started yet). What you're describing comes after all that, which I already understand and am not asking about.

>>datafl+8p
Without any context in terms of what the VM is doing or what VMM software you use, my best guess is that the OS/VMM are pre-allocating memory for the VM. This might involve paging out other processes' memory, which could take some time.

I think task manager would tell you if there is a blip of memory usage and paging activity at the time. And I'm sure windows itself has profilers that can tell you what is happening when the VM is started..

>>drewg1+8w
VirtualBox on Windows, primarily. Though I feel like haven't seen other VMs in the past start up a whole ton faster (maybe a somewhat) (ignoring WSL2). Page files are already disabled, there's plenty of free RAM, and it makes no difference how little RAM the guest is allocated (even if it's 256MB). So no, those are not the issues. VirtualBox itself seems to be doing something slow during that time and I don't know what that is.

>>datafl+zw
I remembered something about VirtualBox not playing nicely with Hyper-V on Windows, and dug up a possibly relevant post[0] on their forums. IIRC we ended up moving a few build systems to Docker and dropping VirtualBox because of hyper-v related issues, but it's been a few years.

[0] https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?t=112113

>>gopher+R01
That's the unrelated green-turtle issue. It's only relevant after the guest has actually started running instructions. I'm talking about before that point.

>>datafl+i11
I'm not aware of any turtles, that was just the first thing I found when trying to see if VirtualBox and Hyper-V were still a problematic combo.

Again, it was a few years ago, but we didn't solve the problem or identify an actual root cause. We stopped banging our heads against that particular wall and switched technologies.