Fedora xen - May 2006 - FW: [IA64]We have successfully booted dom0/domU/domVTI (xen/ia64) on FC5

Due to picture size exceeding limitation of mailing list, it''s waiting
for approval now. So, send out notification first for your reference. :-)

Thanks
-Xiantao

-----Original Message-----
From: Zhang, Xiantao 
Sent: 2006年5月26日 16:24
To: fedora-xen@redhat.com
Subject: [IA64]We have successfully booted dom0/domU/domVTI (xen/ia64) on FC5 

Hi, all,
	After some hard debug and work around, now we''ve got xen/ia64
dom0/domU/domVTI both up on FC5-IA64. Attached is the snapshot.

	We still use python2.4.2 contained in FC5 for test. 

	We need following changes to make things happen:

	- xen-tools is not built and integrated into the RPM package. Typically we know
there''re 3 major directories on xen-ia64-unstable.hg: xen,linux-sparse
and tools. All three need to be kept consistence with each other. However
current fedora-kernel-ia64 only incorporates former two and tools is totally
missed. We tried to build the tools individually from xen-ia64-unstable under
same Rev (10150), and then install to target box manually.

	- The configuration files for dom0/domU seems a big difference compared to
xen-ia64-unstable.hg. (Why?) Currently the ext3 is compiled as module, however
initrd doesn''t work for domU even when we add "ramdisk=" in
config file. So we change ext3 to be kernel built-in, and then domU can boot up
immediately.
		* Xen-ia64-unstable.hg doesn''t have IDE devices configured for domU,
however fedora-kernel-ia64 does, which wastes much time for probe. If the
configuration file can be kept consistence with xen-ia64-unstable.hg, above
issues are gone.

	After above 2 changes, both domU and domVTI can be boot successfully.

	Following are other tricky issues we''ve observed:
	- brctl package is not integrated into FC5 and so vnif is not available now.
People need to install brctl manually and we''ll try network later. Is
it possible to add dependency check upon brctl in spec file?

	- When installing xen0 rpm package, it depends on xen rpm package. However we
didn''t find the xen rpm package, and had to install with
"nodeps". Actually xen image has been included in xen0 rpm package.

	- Is it possible to use same configuration file for xen0/xenU just like current
xen-ia64-unstable.hg? Or at least give a configuration option to user in spec.

	- Even everything works now, we kept seeing some boring call trace from BUG in
mm/slab.c:2818, especially when vncserver is started. Actually even dom0 itself
will encounter such warning infrequently before xend start.

Cheers!
-Xiantao and Kevin

Hi
> Hi, all,
> 	After some hard debug and work around, now we''ve got xen/ia64
dom0/domU/domVTI both up on FC5-IA64. Attached is the snapshot.
Congrats
> 	Following are other tricky issues we''ve observed:
> 	- brctl package is not integrated into FC5 and so vnif is not available
now. People need to install brctl manually and we''ll try network later.
Is it possible to add dependency check upon brctl in spec file?
Ein?
[quintela@trasno ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/sbin/brctl
bridge-utils-1.0.6-1.2
[quintela@trasno ~]$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux)
[quintela@trasno ~]$

Or do you mean that it is not integrated in fedora?

Later, JUan.

Zhang, Xiantao wrote:  [Fri May 26 2006, 04:30:12AM EDT]
> 	After some hard debug and work around, now we''ve got xen/ia64
dom0/domU/domVTI both up on FC5-IA64. Attached is the snapshot.
Woohoo!  :-)
> 	We still use python2.4.2 contained in FC5 for test. 
> 
> 	We need following changes to make things happen:
> 
> 	- xen-tools is not built and integrated into the RPM package.
> 	Typically we know there''re 3 major directories on
> 	xen-ia64-unstable.hg: xen,linux-sparse and tools. All three
> 	need to be kept consistence with each other. However current
> 	fedora-kernel-ia64 only incorporates former two and tools is
> 	totally missed. We tried to build the tools individually from
> 	xen-ia64-unstable under same Rev (10150), and then install to
> 	target box manually. 
You need to install the xen rpm which is available from my yum
repository.  See here for instructions:

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2006-May/msg00140.html
> 	- The configuration files for dom0/domU seems a big difference
> 	compared to xen-ia64-unstable.hg. (Why?) Currently the ext3 is
> 	compiled as module, however initrd doesn''t work for domU even
> 	when we add "ramdisk=" in config file. So we change ext3 to be
> 	kernel built-in, and then domU can boot up immediately.
Ok, I''ll fix that in the rpm.
> 	- Xen-ia64-unstable.hg doesn''t have IDE devices configured for
> 	domU, however fedora-kernel-ia64 does, which wastes much time
> 	for probe. If the configuration file can be kept consistence
> 	with xen-ia64-unstable.hg, above issues are gone.
That''s my mistake too.  I''ll fix it.
> 	After above 2 changes, both domU and domVTI can be boot successfully.
> 
> 	Following are other tricky issues we''ve observed:
> 	- brctl package is not integrated into FC5 and so vnif is not
> 	available now. People need to install brctl manually and we''ll
> 	try network later. Is it possible to add dependency check upon
> 	brctl in spec file?
The dependency is in the xen rpm...
> 	- When installing xen0 rpm package, it depends on xen rpm
> 	package. However we didn''t find the xen rpm package, and had
> 	to install with "nodeps". Actually xen image has been included
> 	in xen0 rpm package.
This is a confusing misnomer in Fedora.  The xen rpm contains the xen
tools, not the xen hypervisor.  Does this make things clearer?
> 	- Is it possible to use same configuration file for xen0/xenU
> 	just like current xen-ia64-unstable.hg? Or at least give
> 	a configuration option to user in spec.
Right now the build follows the pattern of the other architectures in
the spec file.  If Juan is interested in pursuing a -xen kernel
instead of -xen0/-xenU, I''d be happy to go that route.

Thanks for sending this great news.

Regards,
Aron

On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 08:51 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:

Hi
> > 	- Is it possible to use same configuration file for xen0/xenU
> > 	just like current xen-ia64-unstable.hg? Or at least give
> > 	a configuration option to user in spec.
> 
> Right now the build follows the pattern of the other architectures in
> the spec file.  If Juan is interested in pursuing a -xen kernel
> instead of -xen0/-xenU, I''d be happy to go that route.
I am studing doing that, but domU already gives enough errors/warnings
(while booting, things like rtc not available and somesuch).

But yes, I will be way, way happier with a single kernel, working on
that :p

Later, Juan.