[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] Radical proposal v2: Publish Amazon's verison now, Citrix's version soon

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 10.01.18 at 18:25, <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, George Dunlap wrote:
> >> * Executive summary
> >> 
> >> - We've agreed on a "convergence" point for PV shim functionality that
> >>   covers as many users as possible:
> >>  - 'HVM' functionality: boots in HVM mode, has support for Xen 3.4
> >>    event channels, &c, booted via 'sidecar'
> >>  - 'PVH' functionality: boots in PVH mode, booted via toolstack
> >>    changes
> >> 
> >> - "Vixen" (the Amazon shim) and PVH shim (mostly developed by Citrix)
> >>   each cover some users and not others; neither one (yet) covers all
> >>   users
> > 
> > Sorry for being punctilious, but neither one can cover all users: there
> > are users without VT-x on their platform, and both approaches require
> > VT-x.
> For the record, yesterday I've decided to make an attempt to
> create a very simplistic patch to deal with the issue in the
> hypervisor, ignoring (almost) all performance considerations
> (not all, because I didn't want to go the "disable caching" route).
> I've dealt with some of the to-be-expected early bugs, but I'm
> now debugging a host hang (note: not a triple fault apparently,
> as the box doesn't reboot, yet triple faults is what I would have
> expected to occur if anything is wrong here or missing).
> I know that's late, and I have to admit that I don't understand
> myself why I didn't consider doing such earlier on, but the
> much increased pressure to get something like the shim out,
> which
> - doesn't address all cases
> - requires changes to how VMs are being created (which likely will
>   be a problem for various customers)
> - later will want those changes undone
> plus the pretty obvious impossibility to backport something like
> Andrew's (not yet complete) series to baselines as old as 3.2
> made it seem to me that some (measurable!) performance
> overhead can't be all that bad in the given situation.

Thank you for giving it a look! I completely agree with you on these
points. I think we should approach this problem with the assumption that
this is going to be the only long term solution to SP3, while Vixen (or
PVshim) incomplete stopgaps for now.

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.