WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

[Xen-users] Re: Minimal kernel for domU

To: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-users] Re: Minimal kernel for domU
From: Rickard Borgmäster <doktorn@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:10:52 +0100
Delivery-date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:21:06 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B0EABAE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B0EABAE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
Petersson, Mats wrote:
I believe that current Xen (3.0, testing, unstable, etc) do not
support Kernel 2.4. It's probably not A LOT of work to make it work,
> but it's still some work.

The Xen 3 documentation doesn't mention 2.4 kernels either, so maybe you're right.

However, I have a feeling that the difference in Kernel size wouldn't
be THAT great - if you minimize the 2.6 kernel, how much bigger is it
compared to a 2.4 kernel? I don't know the answer, but I would think
that the KERNEL itself isn't that much difference - 2.6 has MORE
FEATURES that you can turn on (or off), but once you've got the same
feature-set, I would think [I'm guessing!] that the size difference
isn't very much.

That's why I'm asking :-) The reason for me coming up with the idea is that the kernel vmlinuz-2.6.12.6-xenU is about 1,1MB while the vmlinuz-2.4.29-xenU (from demoCD) is just 816KB. So I thought it would be worth asking about.

Are you planning on running VERY many domains with small memory
> footprint?

I don't know what VERY many domains means to you, but yes, sort of, since everything is relative.

What we are trying to accomplish is to build a bootable LiveCD with Xen (this is sort of done already). In the booted knoppix environment, a number of virtual machines should be started up, to run nothing but a routing daemon (quagga / zebra).

The goal is to have a Cisco router simulator on a bootable CD-Rom, for students to practice routing scenarions without any physical Cisco routers. Furthermore, the goal is to run 10 virtual routers on a computer with only 256MB ram.

This could be done. I know that. Tests with Xen 2.0.7 before Christmas showed that domU's could boot with only 12MB Ram. Now we're going for Xen 3, and today the minimum domU memory that will still boot domU, is 17MB. But that is too big. The host can only run 8 domU's before crashing.

Consider that the page-tables for just mapping the memory once in a
1GB system takes up one megabyte [or two megabytes if you use PAE].
Obviously, if you're running multiple tasks, each task would have some
amount of page-table entries, possibly including duplicate ones for
user-mode mappings of shared memory regions and in some cases also
duplicates for the kernel space memory.

I do know some about computers, but the above was a bit too complicated for me I think... Maybe you can translate it to more understandable text now that you know the background. I suspect it might be useful information...

Best regards
Rickard Borgmäster


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>