similar to: TCP Tunnel Info

I am running NOX controller with a python script that prints out the destination mac and the source mac for each packet arriving at the now controller and then floods it out. So here's what happening: With em1 connected, all the packets that arrive at em1 are coming to the controller and printing out the details. However, without em1 connected to the OVS, when I have the following setup:

Hi Michael, Looks like the discussions tapered off, but do you have a plan to implement this if people are eventually fine with it? We want to extend this to support multiple VMs. On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima at intel.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >> Hello! >> During the KVM

Hi Michael, Looks like the discussions tapered off, but do you have a plan to implement this if people are eventually fine with it? We want to extend this to support multiple VMs. On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima at intel.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >> Hello! >> During the KVM

Hi Michael, When you talk about VFIO in guest, is it with a purely emulated IOMMU in Qemu? Also, I am not clear on the following points: 1. How transient memory would be mapped using BAR in the backend VM 2. How would the backend VM update the dirty page bitmap for the frontend VM Regards Varun > -----Original Message----- > From: qemu-devel-bounces+varun.sethi=freescale.com at nongnu.org

Hi Michael, When you talk about VFIO in guest, is it with a purely emulated IOMMU in Qemu? Also, I am not clear on the following points: 1. How transient memory would be mapped using BAR in the backend VM 2. How would the backend VM update the dirty page bitmap for the frontend VM Regards Varun > -----Original Message----- > From: qemu-devel-bounces+varun.sethi=freescale.com at nongnu.org

Hi , I have two virtual machines VM1 and VM2. Then I have added eth0 of my VM to 'default' network. Use case :- I want to monitor all traffic on virbr0('default' network). Steps followed :- 1. Add VM1 eth0 to virbr0 2. Add VM2 eth1 to virbr0 3. brctl setageing ovsbr0 0 ..(To put bridge in promiscuous) Now I am running tcpdump on eth1 of VM2 and trying to ping

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35:55AM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > Hello! > > During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top > > of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative > > that has several advantages over that - please see below. > >

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35:55AM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > Hello! > > During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top > > of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative > > that has several advantages over that - please see below. > >

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/06/2014 10:06 AM, Yuanzhen Gu wrote: > > yes, I got your point, thanks very much Eric. > > not entirely, because you still top-posted. > > got it entirely this time, not top-posted. > > > > If I want to take a distributed snapshot, which need pause all the VMs > and >

[It may be necessary to remove virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org from CC if you are a non-TC member.] Hi, Some modern networking applications bypass the kernel network stack so that rx/tx rings and DMA buffers can be directly mapped. This is typical in DPDK applications where virtio-net currently is one of several NIC choices. Existing virtio-net implementations are not optimized for VM-to-VM

[It may be necessary to remove virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org from CC if you are a non-TC member.] Hi, Some modern networking applications bypass the kernel network stack so that rx/tx rings and DMA buffers can be directly mapped. This is typical in DPDK applications where virtio-net currently is one of several NIC choices. Existing virtio-net implementations are not optimized for VM-to-VM

We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since any delay or blocking of a single packet may delay or block the guest transmission. Consider the following setup: +-----+ +-----+ | VM1 | | VM2 | +--+--+

We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since any delay or blocking of a single packet may delay or block the guest transmission. Consider the following setup: +-----+ +-----+ | VM1 | | VM2 | +--+--+

Libvirt doesn't care about security during hot add disk images. It even accepts addition of disk images of other guest running on the host. Steps followed to create this scenario : Started two VMs with following security configurations: vm1: <seclabel type='dynamic' model='selinux' relabel='yes'>

Am 2015-04-27 um 12:17 schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Luke Gorrie <luke at snabb.co> wrote: >> On 24 April 2015 at 15:22, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> The motivation for making VM-to-VM fast is that while software >>> switches on the host are efficient today (thanks to vhost-user), there

We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since any delay or blocking of a single packet may delay or block the guest transmission. Consider the following setup: +-----+ +-----+ | VM1 | | VM2 | +--+--+

We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since any delay or blocking of a single packet may delay or block the guest transmission. Consider the following setup: +-----+ +-----+ | VM1 | | VM2 | +--+--+

On 03/10/2014 04:03 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:28:27PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> > We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs >> > exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation >> > of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since >> > any delay or blocking

On 03/10/2014 04:03 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:28:27PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> > We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs >> > exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation >> > of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since >> > any delay or blocking

On 02/25/2014 09:57 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 02:53:58PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> We used to stop the handling of tx when the number of pending DMAs >> exceeds VHOST_MAX_PEND. This is used to reduce the memory occupation >> of both host and guest. But it was too aggressive in some cases, since >> any delay or blocking of a single packet