0

What is the main difference between the ACRN and the firecracker hypervisors ?

As I understand, ACRN

The ACRN Hypervisor is a Type 1 reference hypervisor stack, running directly on the bare-metal hardware, and is suitable for a variety of IoT and embedded device solutions.

Only on the embedded devices, why ?

As I understand, Firecracker

Firecracker runs workloads in lightweight virtual machines, called microVMs, which combine the security and isolation properties provided by hardware virtualization technology with the speed and flexibility of containers.

My questions:

  1. But where is the other key differences ?
    • The ACRN is 1-st type, while the Firecracker the 2 type.
    • Both of them are use the VMM (virtual machine manager).
    • The Firecracker use the KVM, whereas the ACRN use the own ACRN hypervisor.
  2. For which cases are these solutions most suitable ? Why ?
  3. What is the difference in performance ?

I would like to use one of these solutions as part of the Kata Containers.

Here is a useful comparison of hypervisors.

Kirill K
  • 101
  • 1
  • 1
    Did you read the documentation for either of them? It does say that Firecracker is already integrated with Kata Containers. You can move on now. – Michael Hampton Aug 21 '21 at 16:12
  • Yep, I read. But the main question is not how to use it with the kata. But what is the difference between them ? – Kirill K Aug 21 '21 at 19:43

0 Answers0