The virtualization architecture can be divided into bare metal virtualization and host virtualization. Which of the following descriptions about bare metal virtualization is correct? (Multiple choice)

Question

Options

• AHuawei FusionCompute belongs to bare metal virtualization
• BSimple and easy to implement
• CIt is difficult to develop the virtualization layer kernel
• DInstalling and running applications depends on the support of the host operating system for the

• A
  81% (38)
• B
  13% (6)
• D
  6% (3)

Explanation

Bare metal virtualization (Type 1 hypervisor) runs its virtualization layer directly on physical hardware with no host OS in between - Huawei FusionCompute is a classic enterprise example of this architecture (A is correct), and because the hypervisor must include its own hardware drivers and kernel-level code to manage resources without OS support, it is inherently complex to develop (C is correct).

Why B is wrong: "Simple and easy to implement" describes host virtualization (Type 2), where the hypervisor sits on top of an existing OS and can borrow its drivers - bare metal is the harder approach.

Why D is wrong: Depending on a host OS for application support is the defining trait of host virtualization (e.g., VMware Workstation on Windows) - bare metal has no host OS at all, which is exactly what makes it powerful but difficult.

Memory tip: Think of it as a spectrum of "closeness to metal" - bare metal = hypervisor touches hardware directly (hard to build, high performance, enterprise-grade like FusionCompute/ESXi); hosted = hypervisor leans on an existing OS (easy to install, consumer-grade like VirtualBox). If a feature sounds "easy" or "OS-dependent," it belongs to the hosted side, not bare metal.

No community discussion yet for this question.