[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] xen.git branch reorg


  • To: William Pitcock <nenolod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:02:28 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Hp02uIJ5nPnkVGM/2mX/UjuwwXrMWLLLpIlLquKzakAvdb/7qvsUlSE7yw0MF/1VJbPUR5g84DbsMqrpemExcd+zlCqNygQxlD0Lo3RywlHZxx7H95yKEbC0RMUGVcpPclqNyS65HOCE58siX2iCQocvosMePCtPdWYnmWZmVdE=;
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

I am talking about usual HVM DomUs.
>the only difference is the running qemu-dm process or stub
> domain.

That's failing with current 2.6.30-rc3-tip under Xen 3.4-rc3-pre
at least through my experience.
Should be well known issue for Jeremy.

Boris.



--- On Tue, 4/28/09, William Pitcock <nenolod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: William Pitcock <nenolod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen.git branch reorg
To: bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, "Xen-devel" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 10:51 AM

I think you are talking about HVM PV drivers. HVM itself is no different
than booting a paravirtualized guest as far as the dom0 kernel is
concerned... the only difference is the running qemu-dm process or stub
domain.

William

On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 02:14 -0700, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
> >I could pull a spare server out of the production
> >grid for testing HVM under 2.6.30 if needed.
>
> As far as to my knowledge Xen 3.4-rc3-pre Dom0 & (2.6.30-rc3-tip)
> support only PV DomUs. HVM is still unsolved problem.
> If i am wrong about that, please advise.
>
> Boris.
>
>
> --- On Tue, 4/28/09, William Pitcock <nenolod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> From: William Pitcock <nenolod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen.git branch reorg
> To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Xen-devel" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 3:13 AM
>
> On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 16:48 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > William Pitcock
> wrote:
> > > Yeah, it's working here now. Thanks for that.
> > >
> > > We intend to start testing the 3.4 release candidate
with 2.6.30
> > > paravirt-ops dom0 in our test environment this weekend.
> > >
> >
> > OK, that'll be interesting. What's your test
environment?
>
> Paravirtualization-only nocona-based (early EM64T) Xeon hardware,
with
> nodes comprising of dual 2.8ghz CPUs with 8GB of memory, on Debian
> testing.
>
> Production is presently at 3.2 with XenLinux 2.6.18 patches
rebased
> against 2.6.26. Production machines are dual opteron 2216 machines
with
> 8GB-16GB of RAM, with both HVM and Paravirtualized domains.
>
> The test and production grids use the same storage backend, which
is
> presently provided through exporting LVM volumes with AoE and
> cluster-lvm.
>
> I could pull a spare server out of the production grid for testing
HVM
> under 2.6.30 if
> needed.
>
> William
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.