search for: paravirtualizes

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:48:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > In general, a paravirtualized interface (for detection of PMEM regions) > might have one big advantage: not limited to certain architectures. What follows is a generic rant, and slightly offtopic -sorry about that. I thought it's worth replying to above since people sometimes propose random PV devices and portability

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:48:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > In general, a paravirtualized interface (for detection of PMEM regions) > might have one big advantage: not limited to certain architectures. What follows is a generic rant, and slightly offtopic -sorry about that. I thought it's worth replying to above since people sometimes propose random PV devices and portability

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:09 AM, David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> wrote: > Btw, I am thinking about the following addition to the concept: > > 1. Add a type to each virtio-mem device. > > This describes the type of the memory region we expose to the guest. > Initially, we could have RAM and RAM_HUGE. The latter one would be > interesting, because the guest would

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:09 AM, David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> wrote: > Btw, I am thinking about the following addition to the concept: > > 1. Add a type to each virtio-mem device. > > This describes the type of the memory region we expose to the guest. > Initially, we could have RAM and RAM_HUGE. The latter one would be > interesting, because the guest would

Hi: Reading Red Hat''s Website and a printed manual of RH184 (Red Hat Virtualization course) I see that RHEL 5 only supports RHEL 4.5 and RHEL 5 as paravirtualized guests. So I asume this is the same situation for CentOS 5, right? What''s the dependency between Xen versions for paravirtualized guests? I ask this questions because I got this experiences: 1. Running CentOS 5 as

In order to create a paravirtualized guest/DomU, should i use the same distro as the host/dom0 is? Or is it possible to install a paravirtualized Debian (as a guest / DomU) into a CentOS (host / Dom0) ? Juan Pablo On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Ferenc Wagner <wferi@niif.hu> wrote: > Juan Pablo Torres <juanpablotorres@gmail.com> writes: > > > Im trying to install a

Hi: Reading Red Hat's Website and a printed manual of RH184 (Red Hat Virtualization course) I see that RHEL 5 only supports RHEL 4.5 and RHEL 5 as paravirtualized guests. So I asume this is the same situation for CentOS 5, right? What's the dependency between Xen versions for paravirtualized guests? I ask this questions because I got this experiences: 1. Running CentOS 5 as Dom0 - RHEL

The virtualization manual doesn't seem to say; does one have to do anything to get the Centos 5.5 paravirtualization drivers installed? Or is it sufficient to specify a paravirtualized guest, and the Centos install will then detect that and load the right things? And, is there a way to check in the guest that the right drivers are loaded? What are they? -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at

I have followed a combination of instructions from this post and have been able to get an Ubuntu paravirtualized instance running under snv_96. Is there a way to "list" the fact that it is paravirtualized? For example, xm list, virsh list, etc. thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hello: According to the Red Hat Virtualization Guide, Windows Server 2003 32-bit will only run as a fully virtualized guest on an AMD64 system. I thought I have seen a lot of discussion about running paravirtualized Windows on CentOS. Is that a bad idea? Neil -- Neil Aggarwal, (281)846-8957, www.JAMMConsulting.com Will your e-commerce site go offline if you have a DB server failure, fiber

On 28.07.2017 17:16, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:09 AM, David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> wrote: >> Btw, I am thinking about the following addition to the concept: >> >> 1. Add a type to each virtio-mem device. >> >> This describes the type of the memory region we expose to the guest. >> Initially, we could have RAM and

Gurus; I''ve been running Solaris 10 on a HVM domain on my machine (running SXCE snv_93 x86) for some time now. Now that Solaris 10 Update 6 (10/08) has been released, I tried creating a Paravirtualized Guest domain but got the same error message I got previously... # virt-install -n sol10 -p -r 1560 --nographics -f /dev/zvol/dsk/rpool/sol10 -l /stage/sol-10-u6-> Starting

Hi, We have found that exist a huge degradation in performance when doing I/O to a disk images contained in single files from a paravirtualized domain and from an HVM at the same time. The problem was found in a Xen box with Fedora 8 x86_64 binaries installed (Xen 3.1.0 + dom0 Linux 2.6.21). The test hardware was a rack mounted server with two 2.66 Ghz Xeon X5355 (4 cores each one, 128 Kb L1

These patches provide the infrastructure for paravirtualized MMU operations while at the same time cleaning up and optimizing the pagetable accessors for i386. They should be largely uncontroversial and are well tested. There are still some performance gains to be had for paravirtualization, but it is more important to get the native code base that will enable them checked in first. Zach

Hello list; Im trying to install a paravirtualized Debian, but as an absolute newbie i´m, i don´t know what to put when the wizard asks me to give an "Install Media URL". Thanks in advance; Juan Pablo _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

Hi all, I'm setting up a virtualization software on CentOS, using virt-manager, KVM, qemu and Xen When I want to create a VM, paravirtualized mode isn't possible (ie it is grey) What should I do to use xen paravirtualized mode ? i figured that xen is not running but /etc/init.d/xend start doesn't work xen and xen-kernel are installed on the machine (rpm -qa | grep xen replies : xen

These patches provide the infrastructure for paravirtualized MMU operations while at the same time cleaning up and optimizing the pagetable accessors for i386. They should be largely uncontroversial and are well tested. There are still some performance gains to be had for paravirtualization, but it is more important to get the native code base that will enable them checked in first. Zach

Hi, We ran a few experiments to compare performance of VMware's paravirtualization technique (VMI) and hardware MMU technologies (HWMMU) on VMware's hypervisor. To give some background, VMI is VMware's paravirtualization specification which tries to optimize CPU and MMU operations of the guest operating system. For more information take a look at this

Hi, We ran a few experiments to compare performance of VMware's paravirtualization technique (VMI) and hardware MMU technologies (HWMMU) on VMware's hypervisor. To give some background, VMI is VMware's paravirtualization specification which tries to optimize CPU and MMU operations of the guest operating system. For more information take a look at this

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 12:31:04PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > This series is based on latest linux-next. The patches are located at: > https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/linux.git virtio-mem-v3 > > Patch #1 - #10 where contained in v2 and only contain minor modifications > (mostly smaller fixes). The remaining patches are new and contain smaller > optimizations.