From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Sun Jan 12 19:07:48 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BEC1DF12F for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:07:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47wmSg52dlz4j8Z for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:07:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.172] (82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00CJ7cNu072252 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:07:41 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23] claimed to be [192.168.1.172] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\)) Subject: Re: Xen performance on FreeBSD vs Linux From: Stefan Parvu In-Reply-To: <20200108154104.GE11738@Air-de-Roger> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 21:07:32 +0200 Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> References: <7E9802F1-172A-41A7-A110-C69A7D8D1192@kronometrix.org> <20200108154104.GE11738@Air-de-Roger> To: =?utf-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47wmSg52dlz4j8Z X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.69 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.78)[-0.784,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.69)[-0.694,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; IP_SCORE(0.59)[ip: (0.37), ipnet: 95.85.0.0/18(0.98), asn: 14061(1.67), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:07:48 -0000 > > Also a FreeBSD dom0 can only work in PVH mode, which is faster for > certain operations like page table modifications, but it's slower for > others, like issuing hypercalls, when compared to a PV dom0. > > I don't have figures at hand now, but guest creation is likely slower > on a FreeBSD PVH dom0 than on a Linux PV dom0, and that's because > hypercalls are more expensive on PVH than on PV (has nothing to do > whether Linux or FreeBSD is used). right. thanks a lot for pointers. A bit confusing is that I see mentioned around that Xen of FreeBSD is experimental. Is this true ? I will have 2 servers to test Xen and Bhyve on FreeBSD 12.1 and check how well the hypervisors work for different guest from Linux, BSD and Windows. Im more interested on bhyve vs Xen on FreeBSd than Linux. We will keep FreeBSD as our main virtualization platform. Stefan From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Sun Jan 12 19:12:09 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3851DF4AD for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:12:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47wmYh68yTz4jds for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:12:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.172] (82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00CJC6Ed072292 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:12:07 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23] claimed to be [192.168.1.172] From: Stefan Parvu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\)) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 21:12:01 +0200 References: To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47wmYh68yTz4jds X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.58 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.74)[-0.736,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx:c]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-xen@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.63)[-0.634,0]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; IP_SCORE(0.59)[ip: (0.36), ipnet: 95.85.0.0/18(0.97), asn: 14061(1.67), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 19:12:09 -0000 >=20 > Okay, so there are some options. Will have a look on virt-manager and = cbsd.=20 libvirtd, virt-manager: no go. * I had to rebuild libvirtd with Xen support * got occasional core dumps from libvirtd=20 * virt-manager is useless, cannot be used to create a simple guests from = debian to centos or freebsd * got all sorts of errors from virt-manager, which does not let me = create or boot the guest after configuration =20 * probable easier is just to stick with xl cli=20 cbsd: havent tried yet. Thanks, Stefan= From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Mon Jan 13 13:51:28 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F7A224641 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:51:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@jservice.org) Received: from mail-qt1-x842.google.com (mail-qt1-x842.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::842]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xFPD1NXFz4W85 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:51:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@jservice.org) Received: by mail-qt1-x842.google.com with SMTP id i13so9110209qtr.3 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 05:51:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jservice-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=k45248q2X7jw/11gtwlCy5MqChKwxyzMqYv6fbrEmI8=; b=dFUJwhW4Hhj6DCxAuo/OodSKGm7eSWkwLaTf/PkjFq2p5ENUcVnznF7gcSOX5kh1XF Kt8jvo48vamsyezLD7zCimH5EmXcouk10/kzeMOZTUCym89SNdaCE10l7kvU2oukGCXm uPPLsuerpY/y2hUWO5RXydzTq35FREzMLPQo5tyuxXpcqy9iK5o8DmnPrX4vTaF3+H5n uBy2cf9aV/cvtacuHwm529eeFJIPS0JewSp04RyyOwhqJbcqBOSvYoZ2jOqESqVJlsQQ 45FOrbN1ee2koL4Mc/qPHpltAnD2z6b0RPC2RMvK2yFZYlHWdZrLIPiVr5VO16xkbFFu F+uw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=k45248q2X7jw/11gtwlCy5MqChKwxyzMqYv6fbrEmI8=; b=RDzCrX6jY3f12fvxqgznkWFNGLFBxT//MN7RKaICB3lbPtOexqcLBidj0p1fX6j9mR rckHTwp9KFH6BTR/ijqQuKk8pgdO+KGfNq/CrfwK3Ln2IYPcTsQP4pYPfUgMWRiIAy6T 4cHmh09cZ5+mD9/8cSgr/AhN/y5HsYdaioRR0dIJRpvymvLQVTb1p92MXGFmK9cVWA3c hrj7fVhSXt3sWZT0PeBoMF7n26CzKey9bZ7Er1HHaPQrO/gNBVS5rNs0l5zaVZ3gIiqq 3gfGwCE1z37ujc1QN3/l12eSy0HnY/qrblBZ6OOleSI/OvGwfY8PiUoG47hA5abQNzIR qaDg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWXV1AxZKS7J9h+aXTKNNyt9aNjlEEopOY0D4jodZ853RYpM+XF yTgGMGEyiCkx0oSe8pb6z3hISRID15OFrx7mKzgHkw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzCbvUeIAxD6IG+aQ1PYssBy2KxY9pokEvspucC6BQpvdCIpkFn+15CwXAEzdT3DgIuHRR4S0GSSp81KyUllHU= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:387b:: with SMTP id r56mr10454062qtb.364.1578923487293; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 05:51:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7E9802F1-172A-41A7-A110-C69A7D8D1192@kronometrix.org> <20200108154104.GE11738@Air-de-Roger> <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> In-Reply-To: <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> From: Juergen Gotteswinter Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:51:16 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Xen performance on FreeBSD vs Linux To: Stefan Parvu Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= , freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xFPD1NXFz4W85 X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=jservice-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=dFUJwhW4; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of mail@jservice.org designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::842 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mail@jservice.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.88 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[jservice-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com:s=20150623]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-xen@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[jservice.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[jservice-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2.4.8.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; IP_SCORE(-0.38)[ip: (2.07), ipnet: 2607:f8b0::/32(-2.10), asn: 15169(-1.84), country: US(-0.05)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Jan 2020 13:51:29 -0000 Am So., 12. Jan. 2020 um 20:07 Uhr schrieb Stefan Parvu < sparvu@kronometrix.org>: > > > > Also a FreeBSD dom0 can only work in PVH mode, which is faster for > > certain operations like page table modifications, but it's slower for > > others, like issuing hypercalls, when compared to a PV dom0. > > > > I don't have figures at hand now, but guest creation is likely slower > > on a FreeBSD PVH dom0 than on a Linux PV dom0, and that's because > > hypercalls are more expensive on PVH than on PV (has nothing to do > > whether Linux or FreeBSD is used). > > right. thanks a lot for pointers. A bit confusing is that I see mentioned > around that Xen of FreeBSD is experimental. Is this true ? > > I will have 2 servers to test Xen and Bhyve on FreeBSD 12.1 and check how > well the hypervisors work for different guest from Linux, BSD and Windows. > > Im more interested on bhyve vs Xen on FreeBSd than Linux. We will keep > FreeBSD as our main virtualization platform. > > Stefan FreeBSD as Dom0 feels (at least ~6 month ago) really somehow experimental compared to my linux experience. i would go the bhyve route if your hardware supports the required cpu features. From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Mon Jan 13 14:08:50 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187A5224BCE for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:08:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) Received: from esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com [216.71.145.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com", Issuer "HydrantID SSL ICA G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xFnF1FLFz4WxK; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1578924530; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=3vX+DxCfvo85Uj3wk7gniT1CyRwhUut3/77Ron8Bmoc=; b=XBskflu2/Kce0P4Zl8zywii8uaZy2ui+yGDfy5RXsRqRZOrrj7EPmA8N Usyi+z1YXNillQ9lzCZ9QfylvrurD0AQ2qa9yL4ndPcn9750fyAoUxvbN fA9sHvBYmummIXTTe1s/mv0TOsBPLa8Wmlfz0EmpgxgQBZPVteBr+0xSF o=; Received-SPF: None (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of roger.pau@citrix.com) identity=pra; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133 ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4 ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88 ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ip4:168.245.78.127 ~all" Received-SPF: None (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible IronPort-SDR: CPG0spfRSsEEtaxIn1D/GG/KObzvPeX8Qp7ag8FxyidWNGr2CDKgxWcYVbp+lA87aPLgWhhs8U mL1QuuGPfhEU9cCmilhvCae9ow3h+ZeE/aUmCE9cwRZZnSzXyNGNjDr5TEOmw/wqjUpIl55ul/ FGtXRhM8x7S7OvUYPcS1vELuXU1yQbCV+qurVDo5EnPdybjD2BDn4OGLQb77DYM+Xzts0HjXAh c+VGEBNvHw/c2MGm1I0VHASk0lA/4D/HpzXyE1thlezs8+Je0p73eOjsTodoSL6Nd9yZqWobG3 DNA= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 10824150 X-Ironport-Server: esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,429,1571716800"; d="scan'208";a="10824150" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:08:39 +0100 From: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= To: Stefan Parvu CC: , Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools Message-ID: <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> References: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS02.citrite.net (10.69.22.113) To AMSPEX02CL01.citrite.net (10.69.22.125) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xFnF1FLFz4WxK X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com header.s=securemail header.b=XBskflu2; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=citrix.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 216.71.145.155 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roger.pau@citrix.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.24 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[citrix.com:s=securemail]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_DKIM_ARC_DNSWL_MED(-0.50)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[citrix.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.9.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[155.145.71.216.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.2]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[citrix.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[citrix.com,none]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16417, ipnet:216.71.145.0/24, country:US]; IP_SCORE(-2.04)[ip: (-6.73), ipnet: 216.71.145.0/24(-2.05), asn: 16417(-1.38), country: US(-0.05)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Jan 2020 14:08:50 -0000 On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 09:12:01PM +0200, Stefan Parvu wrote: > > > > Okay, so there are some options. Will have a look on virt-manager and cbsd. > > > libvirtd, virt-manager: no go. > > * I had to rebuild libvirtd with Xen support > > * got occasional core dumps from libvirt Can you report those? (ie: send the dumps here so they can be analyzed and either fixed or forwarded to the appropriate upstream project) Without us getting detailed bug reports it's very likely that this is not going to improve. > > * virt-manager is useless, cannot be used to create a simple guests from debian to centos or freebsd > > * got all sorts of errors from virt-manager, which does not let me create or boot the guest after configuration This should also be properly reported, what did you try, what did you expect and what did happen instead. Again, without getting reports it's not likely that this is going to improve. I'm adding the FreeBSD libvirt maintainer so he is aware. Thanks, Roger. From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Mon Jan 13 14:10:56 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633F6224C76 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:10:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) Received: from esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com [216.71.145.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com", Issuer "HydrantID SSL ICA G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xFqg4nHHz4X2J for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:10:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1578924656; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=glHhmy283PZiYd9YLFSbHRhfbq9Lpste9beImf6xNjY=; b=ZpvrQ34a+TlKmedKPcw5IJmUDjWHjjYc7N5z95+UGwy3G0KqiKpjzS5u BT//8wjYsQnnPD70q2s+w9p9I7GBa6Td90ZLSAtMGYAXZy6X04lN3zOXO odRddd1g9DOgRYLzPhux6GZ+hpaVX7GSmXrfc3huJLtuIex6x+HTkbnTd Y=; Received-SPF: None (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of roger.pau@citrix.com) identity=pra; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133 ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4 ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88 ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ip4:168.245.78.127 ~all" Received-SPF: None (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible IronPort-SDR: yxcybF1zPQEt3dQNIs6WFciDxhALdL4qbUmMheYTw5WcN23Bo6/hqEIH6yBviWfZeZlKpoB+rd 7e+5u3Sl6wCB7pJKPVr2q3oyjuqM9HLolHhAiE9P7W7Ulxa3EUP6W98fuxQWHASLMj6JJOUnx9 vKo3DMrU88rAmDL4WuPLeob8k5k3JvnStEArDtBbNa0Bj9FQDqLn3nMdeSJ08Uf1NJS5ahhy35 v9L3d5fxGJooF34fNwFHoKT70CRByPZrsOap9uo2os1aSB/6Q7qDdwEGekZdUfYRthvtTvH3b+ Nf4= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 10997619 X-Ironport-Server: esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,429,1571716800"; d="scan'208";a="10997619" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:10:44 +0100 From: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= To: Stefan Parvu CC: Subject: Re: Xen performance on FreeBSD vs Linux Message-ID: <20200113141044.GK11738@Air-de-Roger> References: <7E9802F1-172A-41A7-A110-C69A7D8D1192@kronometrix.org> <20200108154104.GE11738@Air-de-Roger> <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS02.citrite.net (10.69.22.113) To AMSPEX02CL01.citrite.net (10.69.22.125) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xFqg4nHHz4X2J X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com header.s=securemail header.b=ZpvrQ34a; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=citrix.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 216.71.145.142 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roger.pau@citrix.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.89 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[citrix.com:s=securemail]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_DKIM_ARC_DNSWL_MED(-0.50)[]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[citrix.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.9.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[citrix.com:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[142.145.71.216.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.2]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[citrix.com,none]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16417, ipnet:216.71.145.0/24, country:US]; IP_SCORE(-1.69)[ip: (-4.84), ipnet: 216.71.145.0/24(-2.19), asn: 16417(-1.38), country: US(-0.05)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Jan 2020 14:10:56 -0000 On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 09:07:32PM +0200, Stefan Parvu wrote: > > > > Also a FreeBSD dom0 can only work in PVH mode, which is faster for > > certain operations like page table modifications, but it's slower for > > others, like issuing hypercalls, when compared to a PV dom0. > > > > I don't have figures at hand now, but guest creation is likely slower > > on a FreeBSD PVH dom0 than on a Linux PV dom0, and that's because > > hypercalls are more expensive on PVH than on PV (has nothing to do > > whether Linux or FreeBSD is used). > > right. thanks a lot for pointers. A bit confusing is that I see mentioned > around that Xen of FreeBSD is experimental. Is this true ? PVH dom0 support in Xen is experimental, the FreeBSD PVH bits are mostly stable and I wouldn't expect many changes there except from bug fixes. The PVH guest ABI is also stable since quite some time ago. Thanks, Roger. From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Mon Jan 13 14:17:25 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55DA22251DD for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:17:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) Received: from esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com [216.71.145.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com", Issuer "HydrantID SSL ICA G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xFz86LYCz4Xkd for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:17:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1578925045; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=/w34tjDUF6C9MVug0733uDHs1zR4WCgyZfKQddNFn/U=; b=PaS8UyJFXFqWg62PPf7DjyD9RJGD5kvAvJecnWiH8gMD4GQFP4XlPCIm oX+0+QM9eLBaB0xPY3mcykIEHKZ0x7aasLvK4g+sFQb42KW3nBlIhDc5s b4OqNOvqXBi1PeOzqTTLX0cHvXi+yPICBbb5orUcCgVX9B3uJrSmMqGwH c=; Received-SPF: None (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of roger.pau@citrix.com) identity=pra; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133 ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4 ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88 ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ip4:168.245.78.127 ~all" Received-SPF: None (esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible IronPort-SDR: zpcKfUENXNsgkUtcLn6kMqD6CvUq/gc+DZduUFL2vc/Ag6ILINHvIoXyLYN+gzh4ZgrXS3sFYZ 0zrXs4PyTvoNMslcvlGfVR8F0wZLitEwFF0ZpJFWphwKJtiM05pWpmz0IAdvVU/n1vFz5lflVT NO0gSG+lbCip5uRDfusJJ2pkPmTW5LY01wDuDvXhTZpQExq1wsKm41R5damo7tFtxeYQfMlphO JY6t87J/K/6H5kngR67RA10SC0kK5e6VjFu0Pv781YsiOLyWgpbVFC6KPFTn2jhQIVDM6vbjI1 RIg= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 10998090 X-Ironport-Server: esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,429,1571716800"; d="scan'208";a="10998090" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:17:13 +0100 From: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= To: Juergen Gotteswinter CC: Stefan Parvu , Subject: Re: Xen performance on FreeBSD vs Linux Message-ID: <20200113141713.GL11738@Air-de-Roger> References: <7E9802F1-172A-41A7-A110-C69A7D8D1192@kronometrix.org> <20200108154104.GE11738@Air-de-Roger> <74365939-48EF-4BA8-9DDF-6309C4D176FE@kronometrix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS02.citrite.net (10.69.22.113) To AMSPEX02CL01.citrite.net (10.69.22.125) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xFz86LYCz4Xkd X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com header.s=securemail header.b=PaS8UyJF; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=citrix.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 216.71.145.142 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roger.pau@citrix.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.07 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[citrix.com:s=securemail]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_DKIM_ARC_DNSWL_MED(-0.50)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[citrix.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.9.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[citrix.com:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[142.145.71.216.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[citrix.com,none]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16417, ipnet:216.71.145.0/24, country:US]; IP_SCORE(-1.87)[ip: (-5.59), ipnet: 216.71.145.0/24(-2.31), asn: 16417(-1.39), country: US(-0.05)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Jan 2020 14:17:25 -0000 On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 02:51:16PM +0100, Juergen Gotteswinter wrote: > Am So., 12. Jan. 2020 um 20:07 Uhr schrieb Stefan Parvu < > sparvu@kronometrix.org>: > > > > > > > Also a FreeBSD dom0 can only work in PVH mode, which is faster for > > > certain operations like page table modifications, but it's slower for > > > others, like issuing hypercalls, when compared to a PV dom0. > > > > > > I don't have figures at hand now, but guest creation is likely slower > > > on a FreeBSD PVH dom0 than on a Linux PV dom0, and that's because > > > hypercalls are more expensive on PVH than on PV (has nothing to do > > > whether Linux or FreeBSD is used). > > > > right. thanks a lot for pointers. A bit confusing is that I see mentioned > > around that Xen of FreeBSD is experimental. Is this true ? > > > > I will have 2 servers to test Xen and Bhyve on FreeBSD 12.1 and check how > > well the hypervisors work for different guest from Linux, BSD and Windows. > > > > Im more interested on bhyve vs Xen on FreeBSd than Linux. We will keep > > FreeBSD as our main virtualization platform. > > > > Stefan > > > FreeBSD as Dom0 feels (at least ~6 month ago) really somehow experimental > compared to my linux experience. Hello, Can you give us more details regarding this comment, and what did you feel was missing or could be improved compared to Linux? Thanks, Roger. From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Mon Jan 13 22:48:13 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 104DB1EFD6E for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:48:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xTJW6GM4z4Hr2; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:48:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.172] (82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00DMlxKW083803 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:48:00 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23] claimed to be [192.168.1.172] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\)) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools From: Stefan Parvu In-Reply-To: <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 00:47:54 +0200 Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org, "" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> To: =?utf-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xTJW6GM4z4Hr2 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.40 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.27)[-0.275,0]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.11)[-0.115,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.59)[ip: (0.36), ipnet: 95.85.0.0/18(0.96), asn: 14061(1.66), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 13 Jan 2020 22:48:13 -0000 >>=20 >> libvirtd, virt-manager: no go. >>=20 >> * I had to rebuild libvirtd with Xen support >>=20 >> * got occasional core dumps from libvirt >=20 > Can you report those? (ie: send the dumps here so they can be analyzed > and either fixed or forwarded to the appropriate upstream project) sure. I should put a list of defects. I need to repeat these.=20 I was in hurry to check on the overall state of the project. But Im = curious: has=20 anyone at least tried, meaning really to use virt-manager for Xen on = FreeBSD ?=20 Because I was hitting one error after another one. Stefan= From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue Jan 14 11:01:35 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC7212252DB for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 11:01:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) Received: from esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com [216.71.155.168]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com", Issuer "HydrantID SSL ICA G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xnZk2zfkz3yfH; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 11:01:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1578999694; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=MknG9Y4cS4V4AVfwvMbaqjZgZ7i4wui34GVHIFMBabg=; b=Lrvpz6woHk921EMJCnRFYKytA8XMaBqAM8Jle/5/fykUg9CU4Aj5/UZ5 XNiEnEPLMCWjHTn/pfthUA/mbLiIRCPM8hxiKdOE6PNouPhV/gwTWFR6e cld/Wlk5yO5AzGqhaUh4bEqmYsELWs6DVDlyLPwcEPQODw0Gire6WCfCJ Q=; Received-SPF: None (esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of roger.pau@citrix.com) identity=pra; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133 ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4 ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88 ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ip4:168.245.78.127 ~all" Received-SPF: None (esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible IronPort-SDR: bkdXgi1WS+xwOeSkjzDDVfqS41FTcq9Z5HZkD/sxfZIAa+a3+8HJgDujYWMvuBejlru4QLjOlD ZzIWEdfoVlLgze1z1S6yuck3OcwVjJ/eZZF23V350G9hQP/ldcEWM6B5n6CIXZ+HSc3PFF4dAU 9apkw+tB9u/483rzPE6KE/3tmtX6KoQJDUbFwls7zpkHdc3TDXbreoHrZkldGQ3ugHKdOPQyLh Rado06hxtFahg+gxj1vIoNHB80046TDas1X2Je1AmrGSAw7WluqrhIiYWk0wpB+JCBYIwpuQJ0 fMM= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 11248630 X-Ironport-Server: esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,432,1571716800"; d="scan'208";a="11248630" Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 12:01:25 +0100 From: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= To: Stefan Parvu CC: , "" Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools Message-ID: <20200114110125.GM11738@Air-de-Roger> References: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS01.citrite.net (10.69.22.112) To AMSPEX02CL01.citrite.net (10.69.22.125) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xnZk2zfkz3yfH X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com header.s=securemail header.b=Lrvpz6wo; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=citrix.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 216.71.155.168 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roger.pau@citrix.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.63 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[citrix.com:s=securemail]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_DKIM_ARC_DNSWL_MED(-0.50)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[citrix.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.9.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[citrix.com:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[168.155.71.216.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[citrix.com,none]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16417, ipnet:216.71.154.0/23, country:US]; IP_SCORE(-2.43)[ip: (-7.57), ipnet: 216.71.154.0/23(-3.13), asn: 16417(-1.39), country: US(-0.05)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 11:01:35 -0000 On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 12:47:54AM +0200, Stefan Parvu wrote: > >> > >> libvirtd, virt-manager: no go. > >> > >> * I had to rebuild libvirtd with Xen support > >> > >> * got occasional core dumps from libvirt > > > > Can you report those? (ie: send the dumps here so they can be analyzed > > and either fixed or forwarded to the appropriate upstream project) > > > sure. I should put a list of defects. I need to repeat these. > > I was in hurry to check on the overall state of the project. But Im curious: has > anyone at least tried, meaning really to use virt-manager for Xen on FreeBSD ? I don't use libvirt at all, so I never tried it myself. I know it works on Linux and is tested as part of the Xen CI loop, see the -libvirt jobs in any Xen CI loop output: http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/146050/ So whatever is broken it's likely to be FreeBSD specific and will require someone from the FreeBSD community to diagnose and propose fixes. The first step should be to report those errors, and figure out whether someone has interest in getting libvirt working on FreeBSD/Xen and maintaining it in a sane state. If there's no interest we should drop the Xen option from the libvirt port to not give users false expectations. Thanks, Roger From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue Jan 14 14:43:03 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1911ED022 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 14:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47xtVH0lMYz4Df9; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 14:43:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.172] (82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00EEgt1I090401 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jan 2020 14:42:56 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 82-203-141-23.bb.dnainternet.fi [82.203.141.23] claimed to be [192.168.1.172] From: Stefan Parvu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\)) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:42:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20200114110125.GM11738@Air-de-Roger> Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org, "" To: =?utf-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= References: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> <20200114110125.GM11738@Air-de-Roger> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47xtVH0lMYz4Df9 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.56 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.19)[-0.193,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.02)[-0.025,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.58)[ip: (0.35), ipnet: 95.85.0.0/18(0.95), asn: 14061(1.66), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 14:43:04 -0000 > The first step should be to report those errors, and figure out > whether someone has interest in getting libvirt working on FreeBSD/Xen > and maintaining it in a sane state. If there's no interest we should > drop the Xen option from the libvirt port to not give users false > expectations. Right. Makes sense. I will handle that in next days and make a short = report about it. If libvirt is not an option I would still like to see how Xen compares = with bhyve and kvm for some of our applications and usage.=20 Stefan= From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Thu Jan 16 17:21:46 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5191EFCCD for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 17:21:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47z9wT3sWdz4KQH for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2020 17:21:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [10.80.218.126] ([193.64.204.56]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 00GHLYD0015469 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 16 Jan 2020 17:21:35 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host [193.64.204.56] claimed to be [10.80.218.126] From: Stefan Parvu Message-Id: <65492F0C-9671-4733-AF39-34D125EA2373@kronometrix.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\)) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 12.1 hypervisor management tools Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 19:21:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= References: <69EDA7BA-EC3C-4C21-9AF6-12723CFAFBFF@kronometrix.org> <20200113140839.GJ11738@Air-de-Roger> <20200114110125.GM11738@Air-de-Roger> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47z9wT3sWdz4KQH X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.61 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.92)[0.916,0]; URI_COUNT_ODD(1.00)[11]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.92)[0.917,0]; IP_SCORE(0.58)[ip: (0.35), ipnet: 95.85.0.0/18(0.95), asn: 14061(1.64), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 16 Jan 2020 17:21:46 -0000 here, some ideas: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D243395 = https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D243397 = =20 Stefan Parvu sparvu@kronometrix.org > On 14. Jan 2020, at 16.42, Stefan Parvu = wrote: >=20 >> The first step should be to report those errors, and figure out >> whether someone has interest in getting libvirt working on = FreeBSD/Xen >> and maintaining it in a sane state. If there's no interest we should >> drop the Xen option from the libvirt port to not give users false >> expectations. >=20 > Right. Makes sense. I will handle that in next days and make a short = report about it. > If libvirt is not an option I would still like to see how Xen compares = with bhyve and kvm > for some of our applications and usage.=20 >=20 > Stefan > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"