From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 15 11:07:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0215210656B6 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E45488FC1C for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o2FB7QNg027053 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:26 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o2FB7QJt027051 for freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:26 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:26 GMT Message-Id: <201003151107.o2FB7QJt027051@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:07:27 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o kern/144629 xen [xen] FreeBSD 8-RELEASE XEN pvm networking doesn't wor o kern/143398 xen [xen] FreeBSD 8-RELEASE XEN pvm networking doesn't wor o kern/143340 xen [xen] FreeBSD 8-RELEASE XEN pvm networking doesn't wor o kern/143069 xen [xen] [panic] Xen Kernel Panic - Memory modified after o kern/141328 xen [xen] [panic] gstat exit causes kernel panic from unma o kern/140313 xen [xen] [panic] FreeBSD8 RC2 as PV domU crashes during c o kern/135421 xen [xen] FreeBSD Xen PVM DomU network failure - netfronc. o kern/135178 xen [xen] Xen domU outgoing data transfer stall when TSO i o kern/135069 xen [xen] FreeBSD-current/Xen SMP doesn't function at all o kern/134926 xen [xen] [panic] FreeBSD-current Xen DomU networking pani 10 problems total. From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 18 12:30:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3266D106564A for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:30:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CEA8FC18 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:30:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 998FFE712F; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:19:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:19:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=/n8ani3GZ3qFrBJ+7GrSGfv+gPw=; b=o2pc3y3UnhRySLWrRtKSdd5kjhSGyaif17p6q0tMqiCA19lGg7oIW2L38oxLvQNsBk6qViA6lGjOUyNvwPP18T0vVXeNCXCGditRSnZB2HQdxuvVZ8ZmPm6MFDugF/Xglm8phWK9ON85uRkG+vB/x6+t61PJEknMX0Cd/cccH1k= X-Sasl-enc: PsYxesZ6SIUyye4At1PnGsfgBWcESUnN92xCTdejOANQ 1268914769 Received: from anglepoise.lon.incunabulum.net (cpc2-dals7-0-0-cust253.hari.cable.virginmedia.com [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 083724CC9D6; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:19:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BA21A4E.2040108@incunabulum.net> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:19:26 +0000 From: Bruce Simpson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100302 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: James Smith Subject: Re: XenTools development for FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:30:27 -0000 Hello everyone on freebsd-xen! I should like to share with you all some developments! There is clear demand for this out there, we just need to negotiate how FreeBSD developers get compensated reasonably for their time on this project. To my knowledge, most of us in FreeBSD aren't independently wealthy, so we do need to charge reasonably for our time, when the work goes beyond that which a volunteer could reasonably be expected to do. What's happened: I visited M247 Ltd in mid February. They are a young-ish datacentre operator who have moved their operation from London Docklands to Manchester/Stretford, just off the Bridgewater Canal, to reduce their overheads. All James and his organisation wants is for FreeBSD 8.x releases to work fine out of the box in Citrix XenServer, and for live migration to work. It's that former part which carries the high price tag, because of the QA needed on the existing code base, to get back to stability. So I have simply tried my best to get things going, and sadly that has not been enough in this instance. Normally I'm a contract R&D guy, not a salesperson, so I apologise for my brash job in trying to convince James of what actually needs to be done. Whilst they were interested to talk about getting FreeBSD/xen working in their infrastructure, I pitched this work purely on a commercial basis, at a very reasonable hourly rate for the market I am in, to give them some idea of what the real costs of retaining a kernel developer on a very specific project amount to. The outcome of this: Based on the reaction to date, I believe this has given James (Cc'd) the frighteners, learning what things actually cost in the software business... ! But to be fair, software is not M247's main line of business, and I certainly don't expect every company I visit to be able to evaluate an expert's work, nor necessarily being able to fund it completely out of their own pockets. Companies get nervous about employing lawyers for the same reason; hourly rates for experts are high. These discussions haven't taken place in the open, partly out of respect for commercial confidence and ongoing negotiations, which have now broken down. In my zeal to close, I quoted on the basis of what the customer needed, not what they said they wanted, and I must fall on my sword for this. In my view, a casual hourly arrangement would have worked fine for this (as this is how the majority of my US clients do business with me), and we might even have been finished by 2 weeks from now, although that is easier for me to say with a src/ checkout on my screen. What's actually involved: Porting Citrix XenTools to FreeBSD is relatively trivial if all the other pieces are in place, it just isn't going to work for this client, without the QA and fixes I was actually quoting them for. That, is purely a matter of engineering. That, and the fact of the significant differences between open source Xen, and the XenServer product. Hence this message in the open. I have kept Kip, Adrian and Robert in the loop about this. I have also been chatting with Justin Gibbs, who is now actually doing much of the QA polishing on FreeBSD 8.0 for his employer. The FreeBSD Foundation CFP closed on 1 March, and so I was eager to guide M247 towards this as a pot which could match their funding for getting QA on the FreeBSD/xen port; Now, we have an NLNet funding deadline up on 1 April. It is now the 18th of March, so time for that is closing fast. Unfortunately without their buy-in, there is little else I can do. I don't manage projects or write project plans for free usually, and I wouldn't be expecting full-blown 3GPP daily rates for, what is by comparison, baby steps in terms of what deliverables and resources need managed. And my position: Anyone who chooses to pick this up, I am happy to forward you my code bookmarks (from reverse engineering XenTools), and details of the test procedures I used to determine FreeBSD/xen wasn't ready to go for this client. I have a copy of the Xen Hypervisor tools book, which I could pass on via donations@. Other prospects on my radar are not interested in Xen. For the moment, I am focusing on other things, as I seem to be attracting strong opportunities at the moment, but I wanted to summarise where we got to, in case anyone else chooses to get involved with this. cheers, BMS P.S.: If we had a FreeBSD consultancy shop established in the UK, as a private enterprise, it would probably have been a simple matter of sending a salesperson to connect with James, and give him a firm figure and timescale. However, we don't have one of those, and Kip has been doing everything off his own back, as far as I know. From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 18 20:47:49 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D64106564A for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:47:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cracauer@koef.zs64.net) Received: from koef.zs64.net (koef.zs64.net [212.12.50.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50308FC22 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:47:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from koef.zs64.net (koef.zs64.net [212.12.50.230]) by koef.zs64.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o2IKlk4F059797 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:47:46 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from cracauer@koef.zs64.net) Received: (from cracauer@localhost) by koef.zs64.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o2IKlkoD059796 for freebsd-xen@freebsd.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:47:46 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from cracauer) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:47:46 -0400 From: Martin Cracauer To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:47:49 -0000 I never got this so I rather ask: Xen should run OS kernels unmodified (compared to their native hardware versions) if you have hardware virtualization support in the CPU. Why doesn't this cover FreeBSD? I am missing something here. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/ From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 19 07:49:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7D51065673 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:49:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fabien.thomas@netasq.com) Received: from work.netasq.com (gateway.netasq.com [91.212.116.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0198FC08 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:49:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by work.netasq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B68C30CA408; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:49:28 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at netasq.com Received: from work.netasq.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (work.netasq.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q1VQAp75Nsz0; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:49:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.1] (unknown [10.0.0.126]) by work.netasq.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D36330CA404; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:49:25 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Fabien Thomas In-Reply-To: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:49:24 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <197157D2-8580-49E3-B897-5D28EEA4DAF8@netasq.com> References: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> To: Martin Cracauer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:49:34 -0000 Yes it works but with lower performance level. The image i've linked to the list have both kernel (a basic kernel like = for real HW and a Xen PV kernel). By switching some token in the Xen config file=20 you can switch from one to the other. There is a third mode which i havent personnnaly tested (HVM) that will normally be between the two in term of performance level. Regards, Fabien Le 18 mars 2010 =E0 21:47, Martin Cracauer a =E9crit : > I never got this so I rather ask: >=20 > Xen should run OS kernels unmodified (compared to their native > hardware versions) if you have hardware virtualization support in the > CPU. >=20 > Why doesn't this cover FreeBSD? >=20 > I am missing something here. >=20 > Martin > --=20 > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > Martin Cracauer http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ > FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 19 13:18:09 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8167F1065670 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:18:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mikemacleod@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f224.google.com (mail-fx0-f224.google.com [209.85.220.224]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBFC8FC1E for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm24 with SMTP id 24so415669fxm.3 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:18:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=6nuuMppDy1mPIEO/ywsR7ac77qr/U9PQkA2WuKhHiVo=; b=c7IvqNnl9Ml635GvKPYviXQjy1LmXpNwmVE6XssSOxDSx11S9OzSujTzo91xDJf0p/ 9RMeLvdTxtAHg1JYqJHPbZpXtnMSWX+A9TLWSwnhB5C0C9/byHH/btrD6S+JPjSxSgt2 3tvrzDWGTHXziDC2XNjy/3fyT7RSiKV/T+uJw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=jJA8353YELbo+FX0rX13ZSFKrnryPkOg1FBV6MGv80fkS4lgjHjwD7z/CEpC9/KWsK i/2yAnVV2RHr6iSD0UTrsG6mZV6Z/yuzcXQ8e8OL7ZCEtljqwUjfALz92aa+moAzC9Iq UF5FzvY6WXxpJyJHLOCU5Y33GiVR/4UFs4pzk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.7.4 with SMTP id b4mr4168248fab.102.1269002855569; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:47:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> References: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> From: Michael MacLeod Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:47:15 -0400 Message-ID: To: Martin Cracauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:18:09 -0000 Martin, Xen has support for two different kinds of guests. Paravirtualized guests are aware that they are running inside a virtual environment, and have been modified to operate well in this environment. All linux kernels above 2.6.27 (I think) with the pv_ops extensions compiled in can run as a Xen VM in this mode. This mode also does not require any particular CPU support. With proper CPU support Xen can also be a hypervisor style environment, in which case the guest is not aware that it is running inside a virtual environment. FreeBSD of any vintage can run successfully in this mode. Unfortunately, there are greater performance penalties to running a guest in HVM mode as opposed to PVM mode. Mike On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Martin Cracauer wrote: > I never got this so I rather ask: > > Xen should run OS kernels unmodified (compared to their native > hardware versions) if you have hardware virtualization support in the > CPU. > > Why doesn't this cover FreeBSD? > > I am missing something here. > > Martin > -- > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > Martin Cracauer http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ > FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 20 04:10:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3B4106566B for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:10:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tajudd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pw0-f54.google.com (mail-pw0-f54.google.com [209.85.160.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB928FC0A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwj4 with SMTP id 4so2952587pwj.13 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:10:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=M7ZJpHn7hXFFeO4RaiOj7ZDToibrNXgTyFGPqW9ujgY=; b=J3A2QSeRBlVJlifn+LoIFHAjfxkSwVnfvi/JHMd+XdTWy9rybSor8Q9cvO575La/1a HcteBaMVN5lHOHjD/USrubH7zBO9KTPCbJfXpX+xrW2qltsqUIW4MrML1vdoqAOl8J0+ XDUCGTacYcuPKsFhJuw61fjy/NVBNsrbutz84= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=hTz19gQ73ubJir0SsjFkGROUhxztok1T8nyCnyqgmnapQn7s+X1hd4VP35QKQh34N0 xUmPc8Hp6JFtGAwBmeXeC9c1/FKCzt36WwW7nBEb8JB0StcdoALplx9XlVTVEGi6h9A/ lle/kCRLNOuaFGJdC3AeGxHrDPFw/Wl57lRMo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.114.188.23 with SMTP id l23mr395332waf.40.1269058235879; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:10:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:10:35 -0600 Message-ID: From: Tim Judd To: Michael MacLeod Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:10:36 -0000 On 3/19/10, Michael MacLeod wrote: > Martin, > > Xen has support for two different kinds of guests. Paravirtualized guests > are aware that they are running inside a virtual environment, and have been > modified to operate well in this environment. All linux kernels above 2.6.27 > (I think) with the pv_ops extensions compiled in can run as a Xen VM in this > mode. This mode also does not require any particular CPU support. > > With proper CPU support Xen can also be a hypervisor style environment, in > which case the guest is not aware that it is running inside a virtual > environment. FreeBSD of any vintage can run successfully in this mode. > Unfortunately, there are greater performance penalties to running a guest in > HVM mode as opposed to PVM mode. > > Mike > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Martin Cracauer wrote: > >> I never got this so I rather ask: >> >> Xen should run OS kernels unmodified (compared to their native >> hardware versions) if you have hardware virtualization support in the >> CPU. >> >> Why doesn't this cover FreeBSD? >> >> I am missing something here. >> >> Martin This is the first time I've heard of any penalty on HVM systems. What I'd like to know, given that I now have some googl'ing I need to do about this, is that for those who have already done this; how big is the impact? Is it so much that general usability and patience a sysadmin does not normally have would drive them insane? Is it similar to like the RCs or BETAs we put out with the WITNESS and all the debugging code? Appreciate any insight. --Tim From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 20 16:19:53 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E34106564A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:19:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51218FC16 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:19:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B20DE95BE for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:19:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:19:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=iWsdkDLlEaosOejToazBfyn+lqs=; b=f6DmwVNqvQ7ZoIp717IZ1qdKWr62d63S3HNGMhFJ2Zfq9MRK7k/Dg/i2L1Yi599SaMbQ3Fa5mO5C0CNdHIxmQljJqx7caQRX3fsPxyzyBmF3AjtrIhAB0iCjWEKACu9zvAxJ407SvKW6RVTi21y2syFVzHRLU3oLZGC3HLX66h8= X-Sasl-enc: Fi6LwMjyhVuqxjtbS7/LYhWPzvZnLwGBOUV6E4JnsHCF 1269101991 Received: from anglepoise.lon.incunabulum.net (cpc2-dals7-0-0-cust253.hari.cable.virginmedia.com [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C81C84C1B30 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:19:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BA4F5A6.508@incunabulum.net> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:19:50 +0000 From: Bruce Simpson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100302 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org References: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:19:53 -0000 On 03/20/10 04:10, Tim Judd wrote: > This is the first time I've heard of any penalty on HVM systems. What > I'd like to know, given that I now have some googl'ing I need to do > about this, is that for those who have already done this; how big is > the impact? Is it so much that general usability and patience a > sysadmin does not normally have would drive them insane? > Nobody's measuring it, to my knowledge, because nobody's had to -- if it's 'good enough' for them, they'll stick with what's there. Of course, blue chip quality engineering is normally what I pitch for in the beginning. Then, we identify what the client can actually get away with. This is largely borne out of experience subcontracting for companies in the 3GPP space here in the UK, and it does require excellent communication between client and consultant. Any pitch to mass consumer market, usually requires the same level of engineering and project management expertise, as for a blue chip b2b sale. There is a performance penalty, because Xen has to emulate real hardware for HVM, using code largely cribbed from QEMU. Normally this happens within the hypervisor itself, however, this is problematic, because there is then no good way to book the CPU/memory/IO involved to the domU doing the I/O. This in turn affects scheduling parameters. Using the grant_table abstraction, though, it's possible to shuffle it into a 'driver domain', as I/O's to the 'driver domain' (another stub Xen domain which hosts the drivers) can then still benefit from grant_table's page flipping in shared memory, whilst booking the I/O so we have a reflection of the true cost of running that HVM domU. I strongly feel pv_ops is the right way to go, however this innovation is happening outside of Citrix itself; it's mostly the Fedora camp who are pushing it. You could consider it a Xen fork. No one is doing this work 'for free', the cost of the innovation is borne by their employers in their line of business. From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 20 16:22:23 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01F92106564A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:22:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32288FC0A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:22:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FBC2E75E3 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:22:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:22:22 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=zpicYzdvRKUy4G84MUWbONdlX38=; b=l9AAHUwHcuvAPWfruHoK2yKWzljKKcA9F0nn3XDHZZYctIS3X8zMG4eQ/d08fhsznlUMgWdt3TgjmqMRCBXMcfY3K1b3u+f+ZT/H/tkm15nrCpXXfwuxSQrrEy+TR6/FHa1sWfzxcT2ugvjtoff3zKvjFhKMN6AVqeJqA/qACBc= X-Sasl-enc: qM2ZYZRWs6nWqr4qeQpIpiGUIb5tdg0OHLbRZIGuO1WR 1269102142 Received: from anglepoise.lon.incunabulum.net (cpc2-dals7-0-0-cust253.hari.cable.virginmedia.com [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF44A4D0487 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:22:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BA4F63C.1070407@incunabulum.net> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:22:20 +0000 From: Bruce Simpson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100302 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org References: <20100318204746.GA57903@cons.org> <4BA4F5A6.508@incunabulum.net> In-Reply-To: <4BA4F5A6.508@incunabulum.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Xen with hw virtualization support X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:22:23 -0000 On 03/20/10 16:19, Bruce Simpson wrote: > > There is a performance penalty, because Xen has to emulate real > hardware for HVM, using code largely cribbed from QEMU. > > Normally this happens within the hypervisor itself, however, this is > problematic, because there is then no good way to book the > CPU/memory/IO involved to the domU doing the I/O. This in turn affects > scheduling parameters. Correction: mostly dom0 with some hypervisor bits on top. But this still screws up HVM domU accounting. In a hosting environment, this is all important. Chisnall's Xen book explains this in great detail.