Port-xen archive

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

Re: XEN3_DOM0 rationalization



John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost> writes:

> On Mar 7, 13:47, Greg Troxel wrote:
> } 
> } Right now I think people need to read the HOWTO to figure out how to set
> } up Xen on NetBSD.  It's getting even more complicated with PVHVM and PVH
>
>      Pretty much all complex software has some kind of learning
> curve.  I really don't view this as a negative.  Would you expect
> to be able to setup Asterisk, Samba, any other virtual environment,
> etc.  without doing some reading?

Agreed.   I just meant that "people will be led astray by the kernel
name" is to me not a compelling argument.

>      PVHVM and PVH are in their infancy and can be ignored by most
> people for now.  I certainly wouldn't include them in the HOWTO at
> this point,  Also, last I knew we hadn't done much at all with PVH.
> The difference is PVHVM is domU running in HVM mode, but with access
> to PV devices (much more efficient since device emulation isn't
> needed).  Whereas PVH is for dom0 so that it runs in an HVM like
> mode.

I guess we can argue about HOWTO vs WHATIS, but I think if it exists at
all in the Xen world it should be described whether or not it works on
NetBSD, how to do it if so, and advice not to use it if that's the
consensus.

I thought PVH was also for domU, to be sort of HVM with PV drivers, but
so that the dom0 didn't need to run a (terrifying security wise) qemu.

HVM is reported to work badly on some Linux dom0 setups in terms of disk
performance, to the point that it is unusable.  And our PV in current
runs into trouble in current with dom0s that use the version of grant
tables we don't.  Yes, that's fuzzy which is why it isn't quite in the
HOWTO.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index