This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3
Now that we''ve begun freezing, and gotten a number of the major
features
in, I think we need to lock down on the new features.
The key goals we''re focusing on now, in order, are as follows:
1. Have a bug-free 4.3 release
2. Have an awesome 4.3 release
3. Have a 4.3 release that happens on schedule (ready by June 15th)
At this point I think a feature is going to have to be pretty cool to
merit an exception under #2.
The most important thing in making a case is to answer the question,
"If there are bugs in this patch, will they be discovered before the
June 15h release?" The second most important thing is to consider the
cost/benefit analysis of bugs that are found: what is the risk of
introducing a bug which will delay the release, vs the benefit it will
have in making the release better?
Please begin to test and report bugs against the release.
= Timeline
We are planning on a 9-month release cycle. Based on that, below are
our estimated dates:
* Feature freeze: 25 March 2013
* Code freezing point: 15 April 2013 <== We are here
* First RC: 6 May 2013
* Release: 17 June 2013
The RCs and release will of course depend on stability and bugs, and
will therefore be fairly unpredictable. Each new feature will be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
Last updated: 22 April 2013
== Completed =
* Serial console improvements
-EHCI debug port
* Default to QEMU upstream (partial)
- pci pass-thru (external)
- enable dirtybit tracking during migration (external)
- xl cd-{insert,eject} (external)
* CPUID-based idle (don''t rely on ACPI info f/ dom0)
* Persistent grants for blk (external)
- Linux
- qemu
* Allow XSM to override IS_PRIV checks in the hypervisor
* Scalability: 16TiB of RAM
* xl QXL Spice support
* Install into /usr/local by default
owner: Ian Campbell
* openvswitch toostack integration
To label "tech-preview" unless we get good testing (>10
individuals)
* NUMA scheduler affinity
* ARM v7 server port (basic)
* ARM v8 server port (basic)
== Bugs =
* xl, compat mode, and older kernels
owner: Wei Liu
Many older 32-bit PV kernels that can run on a 64-bit hypervisor with
xend do not work when started with xl. The following work-around seems to
work:
xl create -p lightning.cfg
xenstore-write /local/domain/$(xl domid
lightning)/device/vbd/51713/protocol x86_32-abi
xl unpause lightning
This node is normally written by the guest kernel, but for older kernels
seems not to be. xend must have a work-around; port this work-around to xl.
* AMD NPT performance regression after c/s 24770:7f79475d3de7
owner: ?
Reference: http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=135075376805215
* qemu-upstream: cd-insert and cd-eject not working
http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=135850249808960
* Revert Jan''s debugging patch (commit bd9be94)
owner: Jan Beulich
* Race condition in claim hypercall
owner: Ian Jackson, Konrad Wilk
* Remove hardcoded mobprobe''s in xencommons
owner: Wei Liu
status: ?
* Windows 2003 fails to install in Xen-unstable tip
> Narrowed down to c/s 2fe82ac11fd078485388fe7c5e8bc3b6ac9185b0
owner: Jan Beulich
== Not yet complete =
* Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0)
owner: jan@suse
status: ?
* vTPM updates
owner: Daniel DeGraaf @ NSA
* xl USB pass-through for HVM guests using Qemu USB emulation
owner: George
status: v6 patch series posted
* Rationalized backend scripts
owner: roger@citrix
* Scripts for driver domains (depends on backend scripts)
owner: roger@citrix
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> * Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0) > owner: jan@suse > status: ?Jan, what''s the status of this one? Are you still pushing for this to make it into 4.3, or will you wait until 4.4? -George
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> * vTPM updates > owner: Daniel DeGraaf @ NSADaniel, I saw that your patchs posted back on March 22 were accepted. Are there more patches that need to be accepted for 4.3, or can I move this to the "Completed" list? -George
On 04/22/2013 11:02 AM, George Dunlap wrote:> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap > <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >> * vTPM updates >> owner: Daniel DeGraaf @ NSA > > Daniel, I saw that your patchs posted back on March 22 were accepted. > Are there more patches that need to be accepted for 4.3, or can I move > this to the "Completed" list? > > -George >It''s done except for the Linux driver being accepted - which I believe is outside the scope of your list, so yes, mark it as completed. -- Daniel De Graaf National Security Agency
On 22/04/13 16:04, Daniel De Graaf wrote:> On 04/22/2013 11:02 AM, George Dunlap wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap >> <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>> * vTPM updates >>> owner: Daniel DeGraaf @ NSA >> Daniel, I saw that your patchs posted back on March 22 were accepted. >> Are there more patches that need to be accepted for 4.3, or can I move >> this to the "Completed" list? >> >> -George >> > It''s done except for the Linux driver being accepted - which I believe is > outside the scope of your list, so yes, mark it as completed.Great, thanks. -George
>>> On 22.04.13 at 17:01, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap > <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >> * Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0) >> owner: jan@suse >> status: ? > > Jan, what''s the status of this one? Are you still pushing for this to > make it into 4.3, or will you wait until 4.4?As also said on irc earlier this morning (I was gone already when you asked yesterday), I''m still hoping to get this in, but it''s not really under my control - I''m depending on AMD to help out debugging on their hardware. Suravee actually pointed out that the problem with the earlier posted prerequisite patches was apparently spurious, but he found a problem with the final patch of the full series, which we''ll have to work out. Jan
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:>>>> On 22.04.13 at 17:01, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap >> <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>> * Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0) >>> owner: jan@suse >>> status: ? >> >> Jan, what''s the status of this one? Are you still pushing for this to >> make it into 4.3, or will you wait until 4.4? > > As also said on irc earlier this morning (I was gone already when > you asked yesterday), I''m still hoping to get this in, but it''s not > really under my control - I''m depending on AMD to help out > debugging on their hardware. > > Suravee actually pointed out that the problem with the earlier > posted prerequisite patches was apparently spurious, but he > found a problem with the final patch of the full series, which we''ll > have to work out.Right -- then from a release perspective, should we take it off the table? Remember the criteria: 1. Will we find all the bugs before the release? 2. What is the risk of finding bugs that slip the release? 3. Is it valuable enough that it''s worth the risk of slipping the release? Will this be enabled on typical hardware, or will it only be present if the user specifically does something to enable it? If the second, #1 is probably less important; otherwise, it seems pretty risky. Regarding 2 and 3, I admit I don''t have a good handle on how valuable the feature is, but absent a pretty high value, it seems like it might be better to wait. Thoughts? -George
>>> On 23.04.13 at 11:09, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>>>> On 22.04.13 at 17:01, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap >>> <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote: >>>> * Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0) >>>> owner: jan@suse >>>> status: ? >>> >>> Jan, what''s the status of this one? Are you still pushing for this to >>> make it into 4.3, or will you wait until 4.4? >> >> As also said on irc earlier this morning (I was gone already when >> you asked yesterday), I''m still hoping to get this in, but it''s not >> really under my control - I''m depending on AMD to help out >> debugging on their hardware. >> >> Suravee actually pointed out that the problem with the earlier >> posted prerequisite patches was apparently spurious, but he >> found a problem with the final patch of the full series, which we''ll >> have to work out. > > Right -- then from a release perspective, should we take it off the table? > > Remember the criteria: > 1. Will we find all the bugs before the release? > 2. What is the risk of finding bugs that slip the release? > 3. Is it valuable enough that it''s worth the risk of slipping the release? > > Will this be enabled on typical hardware, or will it only be present > if the user specifically does something to enable it? If the second, > #1 is probably less important; otherwise, it seems pretty risky.On suitable hardware it would get used by default, provided the kernel also has been enabled accordingly.> Regarding 2 and 3, I admit I don''t have a good handle on how valuable > the feature is, but absent a pretty high value, it seems like it might > be better to wait.It''s primarily a load spreading feature, allowing to distribute interrupts more evenly across (v)CPUs. And yes, since we''re making so slow progress with this, I''m inclined to agree, however much I regret that. Jan
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:00 PM, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> == Bugs = > * qemu-upstream: cd-insert and cd-eject not working > http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=135850249808960Where are we with the problems reported in this thread? "xl cd-eject" works fine for me with qemu-upstream, as does network after suspend/resume. I also don''t have any extraneous cdrom or floppy devices (AFAICT at a quick smoke-test). -George