Hi I''m wondering what does viridian=1 option actually does? I installed Xen 3.4.1 from Gitco''s and installed Windows 2008 R2 (standard) server, 64-bit, which supposed is hyper-v aware? But looking device manager i dont see anything special, still all using emulation drivers. Should i install Hyper-V IC? Terveisin/Regards, Pekka Panula, Net Servant Oy _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> > Hi > > I''m wondering what does viridian=1 option actually does? I installedXen 3.4.1> from Gitco''s and installed Windows 2008 R2 (standard) server, 64-bit,which> supposed is hyper-v aware? But looking device manager i dont seeanything> special, still all using emulation drivers. Should i install Hyper-VIC?>One thing it does is disable a particular type of crash where an inter-cpu interrupt/message is not delivered as fast as it would be on a physical machine. I don''t think it presents a hyperv compatible driver layer to the domu though. James _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:52:39AM +0300, Pekka.Panula@sofor.fi wrote:> Hi > > I''m wondering what does viridian=1 option actually does? I installed Xen > 3.4.1 from Gitco''s and installed Windows 2008 R2 (standard) server, > 64-bit, which supposed is hyper-v aware? But looking device manager i dont > see anything special, still all using emulation drivers. Should i install > Hyper-V IC? >See here for more information: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2009-07/msg00661.html So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. -- Pasi _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Am 20.08.2009 09:35, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:52:39AM +0300, Pekka.Panula@sofor.fi wrote: >> Hi >> >> I''m wondering what does viridian=1 option actually does? I installed Xen >> 3.4.1 from Gitco''s and installed Windows 2008 R2 (standard) server, >> 64-bit, which supposed is hyper-v aware? But looking device manager i dont >> see anything special, still all using emulation drivers. Should i install >> Hyper-V IC? >> > > See here for more information: > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2009-07/msg00661.html > > So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers.I still would vote for further investigation and development on viridian enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, and would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than just far away from ready for production. As I mentioned before a first real win would be to exploit the viridian stuff to get an out-of-box working shutdown notification. Florian> > -- Pasi > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 01:14:13PM +0200, Florian Manschwetus wrote:> Am 20.08.2009 09:35, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen: > >On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:52:39AM +0300, Pekka.Panula@sofor.fi wrote: > >>Hi > >> > >>I''m wondering what does viridian=1 option actually does? I installed Xen > >>3.4.1 from Gitco''s and installed Windows 2008 R2 (standard) server, > >>64-bit, which supposed is hyper-v aware? But looking device manager i dont > >>see anything special, still all using emulation drivers. Should i install > >>Hyper-V IC? > >> > > > >See here for more information: > >http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2009-07/msg00661.html > > > >So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. > I still would vote for further investigation and development on viridian > enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, and > would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. > The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than just > far away from ready for production.Yes, definitely that would be good. Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian interfaces can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also iirc ms released some docs about the interfaces.> As I mentioned before a first real win would be to exploit the viridian > stuff to get an out-of-box working shutdown notification. >Indeed. -- Pasi _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> > >So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. > > I still would vote for further investigation and development on viridian > > enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, and > > would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. > > The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than just > > far away from ready for production. > > Yes, definitely that would be good. > > Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian interfaces > can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also iirc ms > released some docs about the interfaces. >You are talking about reverse engineering a backend driver to match the frontend driver in Linux. That would certainly be an interesting project, but I wonder how Microsoft would feel about it :) James _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Am 21.08.2009 04:23, schrieb James Harper:>>>> So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. >>> I still would vote for further investigation and development on viridian >>> enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, and >>> would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. >>> The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than just >>> far away from ready for production. >> >> Yes, definitely that would be good. >> >> Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian interfaces >> can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also iirc ms >> released some docs about the interfaces. >> > > You are talking about reverse engineering a backend driver to match the frontend driver in Linux. That would certainly be an interesting project, but I wonder how Microsoft would feel about it :) > > JamesUhm, James you have the best knowledge about this topic (the other way around), would you say this is a real gap? Or is the GPLPV-driver on the way to fill it anyway soon, especially are there plans to get the drivers signed? As I see it there wouldn''t be any other proper solutions for this topic. Florian> > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> > Am 21.08.2009 04:23, schrieb James Harper: > >>>> So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. > >>> I still would vote for further investigation and development onviridian> >>> enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing,and> >>> would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. > >>> The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more thanjust> >>> far away from ready for production. > >> > >> Yes, definitely that would be good. > >> > >> Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian > interfaces > >> can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also iirc ms > >> released some docs about the interfaces. > >> > > > > You are talking about reverse engineering a backend driver to match the > frontend driver in Linux. That would certainly be an interesting project,but> I wonder how Microsoft would feel about it :) > > > > James > > Uhm, James you have the best knowledge about this topic (the other way > around), would you say this is a real gap?I''m not at all familiar with HyperV aside from a little bit of knowledge about what viridian=1 does, and only then because viridian=1 crashed gplpv due to a bug in the way I had implemented my cpuid calls. The point I was making is that Microsoft have provided the open source drivers to better allow other operating systems to integrate with their product. If you reverse engineer that to make their operating systems work better with xen then they might get a little bit upset... or they might not... I''m not a Microsoft lawyer :) There may well be some technical limitations that prevent a HyperV compatible backend layer being added to Xen... I don''t know enough about either to say. If it could be done, then a whole lot of things would ''just work'', and as you say it could solve a lot of driver issues.> Or is the GPLPV-driver on the > way to fill it anyway soon, especially are there plans to get the > drivers signed? As I see it there wouldn''t be any other proper solutions > for this topic.I''m trying to fix a few bugs in the shutdown/suspend/resume/etc paths at the moment and it''s proving a long and frustrating exercise, and I haven''t had a lot of time to work on it lately. James _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On 08/21/2009 02:15 PM, James Harper wrote:>> >> Am 21.08.2009 04:23, schrieb James Harper: >>>>>> So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. >>>>> I still would vote for further investigation and development on > viridian >>>>> enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, > and >>>>> would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. >>>>> The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than > just >>>>> far away from ready for production. >>>> >>>> Yes, definitely that would be good. >>>> >>>> Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian >> interfaces >>>> can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also iirc ms >>>> released some docs about the interfaces. >>>> >>> >>> You are talking about reverse engineering a backend driver to match the >> frontend driver in Linux. That would certainly be an interesting project, > but >> I wonder how Microsoft would feel about it :) >>> >>> James >> >> Uhm, James you have the best knowledge about this topic (the other way >> around), would you say this is a real gap? > > I''m not at all familiar with HyperV aside from a little bit of knowledge > about what viridian=1 does, and only then because viridian=1 crashed gplpv > due to a bug in the way I had implemented my cpuid calls. > > The point I was making is that Microsoft have provided the open source > drivers to better allow other operating systems to integrate with their > product. If you reverse engineer that to make their operating systems work > better with xen then they might get a little bit upset... or they might > not... I''m not a Microsoft lawyer :) >Guessing how the otherside should behave is not for the faint of heart I suppose. Ask the guys from samba on how they struggle to make samba a Domain controller ... Concerning upsetting Microsoft I don''t see the problem that''s what Samba team is doing and there is a lot of project in the wild doing the same with MS products and other products. Problem starts if you use patented software methods (and well at least in US mainly for the moment as for UE software patents are not valid). I have 0 knowledge of HyperV technology but maybe the drivers for a guest Windows into a Windows host are not by default installed in the guest but proposed by the host to the guest in a similar way of how it works with virtualbox or vmware (but it seems that starting from w2k8 this drivers are already installed ... is it true ? is it true also for Windows 7 ?). I found some documentation about the functional spec of HyperV http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=91e2e518-c62c-4ff2-8e50-3a37ea4100f5&DisplayLang=en> There may well be some technical limitations that prevent a HyperV > compatible backend layer being added to Xen... I don''t know enough about > either to say. > > If it could be done, then a whole lot of things would ''just work'', and as > you say it could solve a lot of driver issues. > >> Or is the GPLPV-driver on the >> way to fill it anyway soon, especially are there plans to get the >> drivers signed? As I see it there wouldn''t be any other proper solutions >> for this topic. > > I''m trying to fix a few bugs in the shutdown/suspend/resume/etc paths at the > moment and it''s proving a long and frustrating exercise, and I haven''t had a > lot of time to work on it lately.Matthieu. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Am 31.08.2009 17:10, schrieb Matthieu Patou:> On 08/21/2009 02:15 PM, James Harper wrote: >>> >>> Am 21.08.2009 04:23, schrieb James Harper: >>>>>>> So for faster IO you need GPLPV drivers. >>>>>> I still would vote for further investigation and development on >> viridian >>>>>> enlighten IO. It would bring us out of the hell with driver signing, >> and >>>>>> would also make a lot of stuff easier from the users stand. >>>>>> The work of James Harper is pretty good but for 2008 x64 more than >> just >>>>>> far away from ready for production. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, definitely that would be good. >>>>> >>>>> Feel free to start working on it :) I believe the needed viridian >>> interfaces >>>>> can be seen at least from linux hyper-v driver (linux-ic). Also >>>>> iirc ms >>>>> released some docs about the interfaces. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You are talking about reverse engineering a backend driver to match the >>> frontend driver in Linux. That would certainly be an interesting >>> project, >> but >>> I wonder how Microsoft would feel about it :) >>>> >>>> James >>> >>> Uhm, James you have the best knowledge about this topic (the other way >>> around), would you say this is a real gap? >> >> I''m not at all familiar with HyperV aside from a little bit of knowledge >> about what viridian=1 does, and only then because viridian=1 crashed >> gplpv >> due to a bug in the way I had implemented my cpuid calls. >> >> The point I was making is that Microsoft have provided the open source >> drivers to better allow other operating systems to integrate with their >> product. If you reverse engineer that to make their operating systems >> work >> better with xen then they might get a little bit upset... or they might >> not... I''m not a Microsoft lawyer :) >> > Guessing how the otherside should behave is not for the faint of heart I > suppose. Ask the guys from samba on how they struggle to make samba a > Domain controller ... > Concerning upsetting Microsoft I don''t see the problem that''s what Samba > team is doing and there is a lot of project in the wild doing the same > with MS products and other products. Problem starts if you use patented > software methods (and well at least in US mainly for the moment as for > UE software patents are not valid). > > I have 0 knowledge of HyperV technology but maybe the drivers for a > guest Windows into a Windows host are not by default installed in the > guest but proposed by the host to the guest in a similar way of how it > works with virtualbox or vmware (but it seems that starting from w2k8 > this drivers are already installed ... is it true ? is it true also for > Windows 7 ?). > > I found some documentation about the functional spec of HyperV > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=91e2e518-c62c-4ff2-8e50-3a37ea4100f5&DisplayLang=en >Also some basic support is included into WinXP and 2003 R2 with latest servicepacks. Florian>> There may well be some technical limitations that prevent a HyperV >> compatible backend layer being added to Xen... I don''t know enough about >> either to say. >> >> If it could be done, then a whole lot of things would ''just work'', and as >> you say it could solve a lot of driver issues. >> >>> Or is the GPLPV-driver on the >>> way to fill it anyway soon, especially are there plans to get the >>> drivers signed? As I see it there wouldn''t be any other proper solutions >>> for this topic. >> >> I''m trying to fix a few bugs in the shutdown/suspend/resume/etc paths >> at the >> moment and it''s proving a long and frustrating exercise, and I haven''t >> had a >> lot of time to work on it lately. > Matthieu. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Apparently Analagous Threads
- GPLPV driver installation for Windows 2000 server
- Shared SAN disk LUN between 2 servers and migration problem
- XCP 1.0 Beta - Boot-from-SAN with multipathing - howto?
- [PATCH] docs: xlexample.hvm: mention the viridian setting
- GPLPV 0.10.0.69 Blue Screen 0x0000007B