WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] PAE support revisited

There are at least two separate efforts looking at enabling PAE in
Xen that I know of.  A couple of us are looking at it and we have
started correspondance with Gerd Knorr, who is also looking at it.

We have no firm idea on when a working implementation will
be available, but are hoping sooner rather than later.

Karen


On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 21:21 +0200, Nuutti Kotivuori wrote:
> I will represent here a commercial look into Xen and PAE support, as
> seen by my company Stinghorn (www.stinghorn.com). The points raised
> are probably not too interesting from a technical standpoint.
> 
> A little background. We are currently offering virtualized products
> and services on top of our own virtualization platform, which is based
> on UML. However, due to the innate limitations in UML, we are
> investigating Xen as an alternative.
> 
> But, the lack of PAE support, that is Xen supporting more than 4G of
> memory, looks like to be an almost showstopper for us. Let me explain
> why.
> 
> We need to be able to have our products working in setups of various
> sizes. In the small end a setup consists of just one or few virtual
> machines running on a rather low end PC, providing services. A medium
> sized setup would consist of running several somewhat memory hungry
> services on a single machine, such as several antivirus/antispam
> gateways. And a large setup would be an operator which takes it for
> granted that they will install atleast 6 gigabytes of memory into the
> machine to run many virtual machines. And these are still x86 servers
> we are talking about, not x86_64.
> 
> While the x86_64 support is progressing nicely, and will support more
> than 4G memory, that does not really help us in this case. Even if
> x86_64 support in Xen was available today, we cannot move all our
> products to be x86_64 only. This is because it is still a young
> platform. Companies do not have x86_64 hardware lying around for
> testing. Distributions' support for x86_64 is still at times a bit
> lacking - we would have to settle only for a few select Linux
> distributions. There are still bugs and undiscovered problems in
> running programs in 64-bit mode. And even the availability of
> Intel-based x86_64 hardware is a bit of a problem. In a year, the
> situation could be entirely different, but as of today, switching
> everything over just is not viable.
> 
> So we would have to support x86 *and* x86_64 - x86 for all the low-end
> cases and x86_64 for the cases requiring over 4G of memory. But, that
> would mean that we would have to have two versions of all our products
> - one for x86 and one for x86_64. Even if we would manage to have just
> two different kernels and the same 32-bit userland (which is unlikely
> to be without problems since some things do communicate with the
> kernel), we would still have double testing effort - once for x86 and
> once for x86_64. And that is a high price to pay.
> 
> We could possibly make due if Xen on x86_64 would support 32-bit
> guests in a way close enough to native 32-bit so that we would only
> have to test the host on x86 and x86_64 and not every different guest
> we provide. But as it stands now, that doesn't seem likely.
> 
> As you can see, we are left with very little options. But if PAE
> support would be in Xen, we could stay x86-only for quite some time
> still. 32-bit only Xen would be fine for us until x86_64 is the norm,
> instead of the exception, and there are services that really require
> it.
> 
> So, we are looking into ways to make this happen. We tried to contact
> XenSource, to ask if it was possible to contract the work for PAE from
> them, but got no reply to our inquiries. I've seen work estimates from
> two or three months to less than a month on the list - but obviously
> it is hard to say without a closer look. Although personally I would
> be very willing to try and make it happen, unfortunately my workload
> is required elsewhere.
> 
> In any case, this is all still only under evaluation and now
> commitments have been made. We do have a working platform at the
> moment, even if it is not perfect, and there would have to be clear
> and definite advantages within our business cases to make the
> switch. But, unless this whole 4G mess gets solved somehow, it is very
> likely we will reconsider Xen again in half a year or in a year, when
> the world looks different again.
> 
> -- Naked
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> 



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel