[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] xen.git branch reorg
Hmm. I'll try to debug it if I have time over the weekend. It shouldn't be very hard to do. Do you have any specifics on what is failing? William On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 08:01 -0700, Boris Derzhavets wrote: > 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
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |