Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010, William Pitcock wrote: That was opposed quite strongly by the kernel folks last time it was attempted. Were there any fundamental changes in the Xen dom0 patches since then? Only by the kernel folks which believe all of the crap that the KVM guys say about Xen. There are plenty of kernel developers willing to see the patches merged. Hmm, you have a problem there. Linus is very likely going to cheerfully tell the Xen and KVM developers to duke it out in a bloodbath, and to not forget to bring AlacrityVM into the fray either. He could care less for virtualization, and he is likely to refuse to merge anything non-trivial until the virtualization crazy people manage to reach a consensus on a sane API. Look for the AlacrityVM threads in LKML if you doubt me. Note: I am not defending KVM. I don't agree with their main ideology (that their hardware-emulating approach is the One True Way). But I can well see why Linus decided to take that instance. Xen's track record from hell on getting their act cleaned up for upstream merging is also going to get in the way. Some people have long memories. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 11:06:56AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: On Sun, 03 Jan 2010, William Pitcock wrote: That was opposed quite strongly by the kernel folks last time it was attempted. Were there any fundamental changes in the Xen dom0 patches since then? Only by the kernel folks which believe all of the crap that the KVM guys say about Xen. There are plenty of kernel developers willing to see the patches merged. Hmm, you have a problem there. Linus is very likely going to cheerfully tell the Xen and KVM developers to duke it out in a bloodbath, and to not forget to bring AlacrityVM into the fray either. He could care less for virtualization, and he is likely to refuse to merge anything non-trivial until the virtualization crazy people manage to reach a consensus on a sane API. Look for the AlacrityVM threads in LKML if you doubt me. Then again the KVM vs. AlacrityVM discussion is a bit different. AlacrityVM is a fork of KVM.. Note: I am not defending KVM. I don't agree with their main ideology (that their hardware-emulating approach is the One True Way). But I can well see why Linus decided to take that instance. Xen's track record from hell on getting their act cleaned up for upstream merging is also going to get in the way. Some people have long memories. Linus has been happily accepting a lot of Xen pv_ops (domU) patches from Jeremy lately.. So it seems to be mostly about the 'quality' of the code. -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net : I think dropping Xen support is a mistake I run KVM and QEMU, with no major problem (no minor either) A full Xen integrated distribution is SuSe, try it. -- Architecte Informatique chez Blueline/Gulfsat: Administration Systeme, Recherche Developpement +261 34 29 155 34 / +261 33 11 207 36 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: It does require virtualisation extensions, but most x86 processors sold in the last few years have them. My SE Linux Play Machine is currently running on a P3-800 system with 256M of RAM. I would like to continue running on that hardware until someone gives me better hardware that uses no more electricity and makes no more noise - I expect that I will be waiting for a while as the machine in question was specifically designed to be quiet and low-power. NB I am not soliciting donations of hardware. http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/07/16/xen-and-eeepc/ My EeePC 701 has no support for PAE and therefore doesn't even run the recent versions of Xen. The same applies to my Thinkpad T41p (which I am using to write this message) and a couple of older Thinkpads that I have lying around. If we could get virtualisation running using older and less capable hardware than an i686 with PAE (the current Xen requirements) then I would be very happy! I expect that it will be several years before Netbook class systems routinely ship with hardware that is capable of running KVM. Even then we won't want to drop support for lesser hardware, it's still out there and still running. I am not the only Debian user who relies on gifts of obsolete hardware for a significant portion of their computer use. Some Debian users do this for environmental reasons, others do so for financial reasons. My personal aim is to never buy new hardware except in the case of systems that break, and in that case I'll buy at auction - which probably means systems that are 2+ years old. -- Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/category/security/ My Security blog posts http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/play.html My Play Machine, root PW SELINUX -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, The hypervisor works well, but the Linux Dom0 packages are not available yet, upstream is again fading behind. Bastian -- What kind of love is that? Not to be loved; never to have shown love. -- Commissioner Nancy Hedford, Metamorphosis, stardate 3219.8 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 04:55:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they will not be supported to the degree that ordinary kernel packages are. I can't see any Xen kernel in Squeeze with support for Xen. Am I blind? Yes, you are. | Package: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686-bigmem | [...] | Description: Linux 2.6.32 for PCs with 4GB+ RAM | [...] | This kernel also runs on a Xen hypervisor. It supports only unprivileged | (domU) operation. I don't see the hypervisor either, the only packages with xen in are: | Package: xen-hypervisor-3.4-i386 | [...] | Description: The Xen Hypervisor on i386 Bastian -- Get back to your stations! We're beaming down to the planet, sir. -- Kirk and Mr. Leslie, This Side of Paradise, stardate 3417.3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net wrote: Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure. Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a constant FAIL state regarding support of current kernels for years. Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber |Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG Rightful Heir | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 10:46:38AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net wrote: Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure. Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a constant FAIL state regarding support of current kernels for years. For 6 months now (since summer 2009) xen-unstable (the development version) has been using pv_ops dom0 kernel as a default. pv_ops dom0 kernel is based on upstream kernel.org git tree (of Linus), so it has been pretty much in sync with the upstream Linux development. Currently it's at 2.6.31.6, but will get updated to 2.6.32.x when the main developer gets back from his christmas/NY break. Upcoming Xen 4.0 release will use pv_ops dom0 as a default kernel. So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream. pv_ops dom0 kernel definitely needs more testing still, so now it's a good moment to do some testing, if you're interested of this stuff. pv_ops dom0 kernel: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps If pv_ops dom0 is not what you want, there are many other Xen dom0 kernel options aswell: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenDom0Kernels -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 11:23:28AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, The hypervisor works well, but the Linux Dom0 packages are not available yet, upstream is again fading behind. If we're talking about Linux 2.6.32 support for pv_ops dom0 here, then that's in progress, see: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2009-12/msg01127.html the 2.6.32 tree should be available shortly after Jeremy gets back from his vacation. -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 07:33:07PM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream. That was opposed quite strongly by the kernel folks last time it was attempted. Were there any fundamental changes in the Xen dom0 patches since then? Yeah, the APIC stuff has been re-architected after that. See: http://www.xen.org/files/xensummit_intel09/xensummit-asia-2009-talk.pdf Actually last time when Jeremy tried to upstream the patches there was a lot of noise, and less actual problems. So hoping all the best for next round.. -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream. That was opposed quite strongly by the kernel folks last time it was attempted. Were there any fundamental changes in the Xen dom0 patches since then? Gabor -- - MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
- Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de wrote: On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net wrote: Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure. Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a constant FAIL state regarding support of current kernels for years. Do you have any proof for this claim? xen.git seems pretty up to date to me (2.6.31.6), and there are already people who are hacking on xen.git who have it working on 2.6.32, which means that xen.git will be up-to-date once Jeremy is back from holiday. William -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
- Gabor Gombas gomb...@sztaki.hu wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream. That was opposed quite strongly by the kernel folks last time it was attempted. Were there any fundamental changes in the Xen dom0 patches since then? Only by the kernel folks which believe all of the crap that the KVM guys say about Xen. There are plenty of kernel developers willing to see the patches merged. William -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 11:26:34AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 04:55:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they will not be supported to the degree that ordinary kernel packages are. I can't see any Xen kernel in Squeeze with support for Xen. Am I blind? Yes, you are. | Package: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686-bigmem | [...] | Description: Linux 2.6.32 for PCs with 4GB+ RAM | [...] | This kernel also runs on a Xen hypervisor. It supports only unprivileged | (domU) operation. No wonder I didn't see it, it doesn't have xen in the name. However that is only a domU kernel, Ben Hutchings said there was a dom0 kernel - was he mistaken? I don't see the hypervisor either, the only packages with xen in are: | Package: xen-hypervisor-3.4-i386 | [...] | Description: The Xen Hypervisor on i386 Hmm. Looks like I was brain dead and did the wrong type of search (searched contents of package as opposed to package names). -- Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 12:01:40PM +1100, Brian May wrote: Hello, I have heard rumours that Xen is not going to be supported on Squeeze in favour of KVM. True or False? I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they will not be supported to the degree that ordinary kernel packages are. The kernel team does not intend to carry Xen patches after squeeze, so if dom0 support is not merged upstream then it will be gone in squeeze+1. The reason I am concerned is: 1) I believe Xen, with paravirtualization (that is without QEMU) is more secure then KVM (or Xen) with QEMU. 2) I believe KVM needs CPU support, and this is not yet available on all modern computers. It does require virtualisation extensions, but most x86 processors sold in the last few years have them. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 12:01:40PM +1100, Brian May wrote: 2) I believe KVM needs CPU support, and this is not yet available on all modern computers. It does require virtualisation extensions, but most x86 processors sold in the last few years have them. With the major exception of most netbooks. A couple of years ago market segmentation was also an issue, especially with Intel CPUs, does anyone know if that still occurs? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Xen support on Squeeze
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they will not be supported to the degree that ordinary kernel packages are. I can't see any Xen kernel in Squeeze with support for Xen. Am I blind? I don't see the hypervisor either, the only packages with xen in are: dtc-xen, xen-utils-common, and libc6-xen. It does require virtualisation extensions, but most x86 processors sold in the last few years have them. Most, if not all the computers I have access to do not have the virtualisation extensions. Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure. -- Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
