similar to: CPU monitoring & CPU cycles

Hi there, I have a question regarding the shares option of the cputune section. I want to illustrate my question with the following example. Let's assume I have two virtual machines like the following on four dedicated core with two threads each: VM1: <cputune> <shares>512</shares> <vcpupin vcpu="0" cpuset="0"/> <vcpupin

Thank you, that's it! virsh vol-list storage VM1   /dev/storage/VM1.img VM2   /dev/storage/VM2.img VM3   /dev/storage/VM3.img [dead] VM4   /dev/storage/VM4.img [dead] A last stupid question (I don't want to make a big mistake ...): Is virsh vol-delete VM3 virsh vol-delete VM4 the right command to get rid of the offending ones? Am 14.05.2020 um 19:10 schrieb Alvin Starr: > >

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 I have 15 vm (libvirt + kvm) with a network brigde and ip address like 192.168.0.1 VM1 192.168.0.2 VM2 192.168.0.3 VM3 ..... The vm are use by other people and I want to be sure that if someone change the ip of VM3 to 192.168.0.1 it will filter it network traffic for him and can't flood the VM1 What the best way to achieve this Hope I m clear enough

libvirt-users@redhat.com TCP Tunnel Info I've been looking at the TCP Tunnel network feature as a potential replacement for the extra private internal networking configuration file. Usecase: This network is supposed to go from VM1 to VM2 without DHCP, DNS or any incoming/outgoing connections to the host or outside world possible. https://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#elementsNICSTCP *

For a virtual guest with the qspinlock patch, a simple unfair byte lock will be used if PV spinlock is not configured in or the hypervisor isn't either KVM or Xen. The byte lock works fine with small guest of just a few vCPUs. On a much larger guest, however, byte lock can have serious performance problem. There are 2 major drawbacks for the unfair byte lock: 1) The constant reading and

For a virtual guest with the qspinlock patch, a simple unfair byte lock will be used if PV spinlock is not configured in or the hypervisor isn't either KVM or Xen. The byte lock works fine with small guest of just a few vCPUs. On a much larger guest, however, byte lock can have serious performance problem. There are 2 major drawbacks for the unfair byte lock: 1) The constant reading and

Is it possible to use this exploit against a kvm guest to read memory used by the host? In other words: if an exploitable service, say httpd with mod_ssl, is running in guest system 'vm1' hosted on system 'virthost' then what implications does that have with respect to guests vm2 and vm3 and to virthost itself? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James

Is it possible to use this exploit against a kvm guest to read memory used by the host? In other words: if an exploitable service, say httpd with mod_ssl, is running in guest system 'vm1' hosted on system 'virthost' then what implications does that have with respect to guests vm2 and vm3 and to virthost itself? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James

Hi, I have 3 xen box with 2-3 VM on each. Each server has 2 nic (1 for external and 1 for internal network). All VMs are webserver and they mount a nfs filesystem. I''ve noticed that on each dom0 there are many dropped packets. Server config is: 1- DELL (2xQuad Xeon E5320 @1.86Ghz - 8Gb Ram - Perc5 - Kernel 2.6.18-6 (debian etch)) 2- DELL (2xDual Xeon 5110 @1.60Ghz - 4Gb Ram - Perc5 -

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'>

Hi all, i need config xen with this ___________ __________ |VM1 |----------------bridge1-------------------| | |__________ | | | ____________ | |-----BALBLA |VM2 |

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

Hello, My testing machine has 2 quad-core CPU (It supports hyperthreading, but i disable it in BIOS). I uses Xen 4.0.1 as the hypervisor. When I use 8 VMs to conduct a test, CPU affinity of the VMs is very strange. Like this: vm_name vcpu_num cpu_affinity Domain-0 8 any VM1 4 1,3,5,7 VM2 4 1,3,5,7 VM3 4 1,3,5,7 VM4 4

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. > >

Hi, As told in "Control Groups Resource Management" libvirt page : Legacy cgroups layout Prior to libvirt 1.0.5, the cgroups layout created by libvirt was different from that described above, and did not allow for administrator customization. Libvirt used a fixed, 3-level hierarchy libvirt/{qemu,lxc}/$VMNAME which was rooted at the point in the hierarchy where libvirtd itself was

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