lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    DateTue, 2 Jun 2009 18:00:00 -0700
    FromJoel Becker <>
    SubjectRe: Merge Xen (the hypervisor) into Linux
    [ Speaking as me, no regard to $EMPLOYER ]

    On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 01:28:43AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > A lot of Xen legacies could be dropped: the crazy ring1 hack on
    > 32-bit, the various wide interfaces to make pure-software
    > virtualization limp along. All major CPUs shipped with hardware
    > virtualization support in the past 2-3 years, so the availability of
    > VMX and SVM can be taken for granted for such a project.

    The biggest reason I personally want Xen to be in mainline is
    PVM. Dropping PVM is, to me, pretty much saying "let's merge Xen
    without taking the useful parts."
    I have only two large machines I control. They're too big to
    run as single hosts - it's a waste - but I can leverage cluster testing
    by virtualizing them.
    The first machine has HVM support. The early kind. It's about
    2 years old. It's so dreadfully slow that I had to go to PVM. That
    runs at very good speeds and I've stopped noticing the virtualization.
    The only problem I have is managing the hypervisor bits, because they're
    out of tree.
    Now, perhaps that could be fixed. Someone told me that older
    HVM boxen can't be fixed; you need a very recent VMX/SVM to perform
    well. But if it is fixable, then perhaps future plans shouldn't worry
    about it.
    The second machine is pre-HVM by a short period. It is not even
    three years old. I can't run HVM on it, at all. I can either run PVM
    or I can't virtualize. It has fast CPUs and many GB of RAM. I can do
    an entire four node cluster test on it, with serious (read, memory
    intensive) software. In a PVM-less world, this machine becomes a
    single cluster node, and I have to go find three more machines. Of
    course, if I had infinite machines, I wouldn't be worrying about this at
    all.
    So I want to see PVM continue for a long time. I'd like it to
    be something I can get with mainline Linux. I don't care if it is dom0,
    dom0 and the hypervisor, whatever. I just don't want to have to be
    patching out-of-tree patches for a pretty basic functionality.
    I don't see 2-3 years as a time frame to assume "everyone has
    one." Otherwise, why does Linux have code for x86_32? Everyone's had a
    64bit system for at least that long. Sure, that's a straw man. It goes
    both ways.
    Like Chris said, if we have technical hurdles for Xen to cross,
    let's get them out in the open and fixed. If previous Xen developer
    interaction has left a bad taste in people's mouths, then the current
    crew has to make it up to us. But we have to be willing to notice
    they're doing so.
    At the end of the day, I want to use Linux on my systems.

    Joel

    --

    "I almost ran over an angel
    He had a nice big fat cigar.
    'In a sense,' he said, 'You're alone here
    So if you jump, you'd best jump far.'"

    Joel Becker
    Principal Software Developer
    Oracle
    E-mail: joel.becker@oracle.com
    Phone: (650) 506-8127


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-06-03 03:05    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2009