Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Nested Virtualisation question

[Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/04/2011 14:32, "Jeroen Groenewegen van der Weyden"
<groen692@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I'm now testing on a intel q9450, which does not seem to have this. I
> will move my testing to a intel e5645 which seems to have this capability.
> 
> Question then is, when will the intel support be implemented? is there
> commitment from some developer? is there a roadmap planned. in short
> what is the story here.

It has been implemented already, for example see a previous patchset
submission: 
http://xen.1045712.n5.nabble.com/PATCH-00-16-Nested-virtualization-for-VMX-t
d2808075.html

It just needs updating to development tip, and in particular sync'ing with
the nestedhvm common bits that got applied last week. Someone from Intel
would have to speak for how long it will take to schedule and do that work,
but I would guess we're talking weeks, rather than days or months.

 -- Keir

> mfg,
> Jeroen
> 
> Op 9-4-2011 13:15, Keir Fraser schreef:
>> On 09/04/2011 11:18, "Jeroen Groenewegen van der Weyden"
>> <groen692@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>> 
>>> The HAP is default set to one, I check this also with a dry run.
>>> Please confirm all this support just amd, because I only have Intel
>>> overhere.
>> Well, quite apart from being AMD only right now (Intel patches have been
>> posted in the past, but they're not in tree yet, and I very much doubt old
>> patches would directly apply to our current development tree), I'm also
>> pretty sure that your machine doesn't support Intel EPT -- if the processor
>> can't support HAP then we silently discard that configuration request when
>> creating a domain. That's why you get error 22 (EINVAL). But even if you did
>> have Intel EPT, because Intel's nested virt patches aren't in tree yet you'd
>> just get error 95 (EOPNOTSUPP) instead!
>> 
>> By the way you can tell if your system supports EPT by grepping in 'xm
>> dmesg' output (i.e., Xen's boot log) for a line stating "Extended Page
>> Tables (EPT)".
>> 
>>   -- Keir
>> 
>>> mfg,
>>> Jeroen
>>> 
>>> Op 9-4-2011 8:22, Keir Fraser schreef:
>>>> On 09/04/2011 06:07, "Jeroen Groenewegen van der Weyden"
>>>> <groen692@xxxxxxxxx>   wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The result with c/s23197
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regular domain now start, en stop normaly, (xl seems to have a problem
>>>>> though, after domain closes a domain null remains in de xl list/ xmdoe
>>>>> not have this.)
>>>>> for nestedVM I added the "nestedhvm=1" in the config file of the domain.
>>>>> but the domain does not start because of "invalid argument"
>>>> NestedHVM currently requires you to be using an AMD processor with hardware
>>>> nested paging (known as HAP by Xen). Most likely you need to add hap=1 to
>>>> your config file (and hope your processor supports it).
>>>> 
>>>>    -- Keir
>>>> 
>>>>> +++++++++ beging console
>>>>> hydra:/etc/xen/vm # xm create groscNestedVM
>>>>> Using config file "./groscNestedVM".
>>>>> Error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
>>>>> +++++++++ end console
>>>>> 
>>>>> +++++++++ begin xend.log
>>>>> hydra:/etc/xen/vm # tail /var/log/xen/xend.log
>>>>>        dominfo = XendDomainInfo.create(config)
>>>>>      File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py",
>>>>> line 106, in create
>>>>>        vm.start()
>>>>>      File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py",
>>>>> line 473, in start
>>>>>        XendTask.log_progress(0, 30, self._constructDomain)
>>>>>      File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/xen/xend/XendTask.py", line
>>>>> 209, in log_progress
>>>>>        retval = func(*args, **kwds)
>>>>>      File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py",
>>>>> line 2598, in _constructDomain
>>>>>        xc.hvm_set_param(self.domid, HVM_PARAM_NESTEDHVM, long(nestedhvm))
>>>>> Error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
>>>>> +++++++++++ end xend.log
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Op 7-4-2011 12:29, Tim Deegan schreef:
>>>>>> At 08:14 +0100 on 07 Apr (1302164093), Keir Fraser wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/04/2011 08:09, "Keir Fraser"<keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>    wrote:
>>>>>>>> Probably the same as this, happening often in the automated tests:
>>>>>>> Likely reason: nestedhvm_vcpu_initialise() being called unconditionally
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> hvm_vcpu_initialise() even though nestedhvm has not been configured for
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> domain. This then fails because there is no nestedhvm handler for Intel
>>>>>>> yet.
>>>>>> This bug should be fixed by 23175:e5a750d1bf9b, arriving at a staging
>>>>>> tree near you at any moment.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And beyond that it's most likely an issue of a broken failure path, or a
>>>>>>> problem in the HAP code with cleaning up a half-created guest.
>>>>>> This one I'll look into now.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Tim.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel