Re: [Xen-API] Guest Utilities - HVM vs PV mode

[Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 08:02:56AM +0400, George Shuklin wrote:
> 
> On 12.02.2013 01:12, Alexandre Kouznetsov wrote:
> >Hello.
> >
> >El 11/02/13 14:52, Pasi Kärkkäinen escribió:
> >>>Does Squeeze's linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64 already includes Xen PV
> >>>support? I believed it was included since v3.0.
> >>>I'm quite sure it's the same stock kernel image, I has the same MD5
> >>>hash as a regular Debian 6.0 64-bit installation I have around.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Upstream Linux has had Xen domU support since 2.6.24.
> >>So yes, Linux 2.6.32 default kernel has pvops Xen PV support.
> >I feel like need to go back to school... Have always been using
> >*-xen kernels, even in DomU's.
> >
> -xen kernels is still better.
> 
> All vanilla kernels < 3.0 can't raise memory over initial value
> (even static max > dynamic max), and time is screwed after
> migration, and MemTotal is not equal to mem_kb for domain... It can
> works, but we still using suse's -xen forward-ported kernels,
> because they more polished, than upstream.
> 

kernel-xen in Squeeze is *not* Suse's forward-ported kernel.
It's pvops, with some additional patches for pvops dom0 support.

-- Pasi


_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api