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

Re: [Xen-users] XEN - Broadcom issue: survey

Hey Pasi,

it's Xen 3.1 compiled from stable source (downloaded last thursday).
It's running on a HP Proliant DL380 G5 with 6gb ram. Host OS is CentOS 5
(kernel 2.6.18 built inside Xen 3.1), guest is Win2K3 service pack 2.

The funny thing is that if I take the same disk image and the same conf file
and I run them on a XenExpress machine, everything runs fine and I see no
packet drop. Note that I said the same conf and image, thus I'm *not* using
PV, just the plain XenExpress server and a manual "xm create" command;
my XenExpress, thus, is running 3.0.4, not 3.1 and is on a different hw (you
can check earlier messages to this list for the details).

So, what I guess from this is that it's either an hw problem (network card
drivers?) or a difference in the kernel/dom0 configuration...

                                                                                
 
M.
                                                                          
M.


Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 01:27:58PM -0800, Pezza wrote:
>> 
>> Pasi,
>> 
>> yes, definitely.
>> 
>> But, as I said, I'm not interested in performance here, just stability.
>> VMWare is slow without pv, but is stable (I can download gigs of data
>> from
>> machines on the same network with no problems; I can't do the same with a
>> Xen vm at the moment), while Xen, as of your words, is unstable without
>> PV.
>> 
>> Right?
>> 
> 
> Hmm.. it shouldn't be _unstable_ without PV drivers..
> 
> which version of Xen? Whist dom0 distribution and kernel? 
> 
> Which guest OS?
> 
> -- Pasi
> 
>>                                                                           
>> M.
>> 
>> 
>> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> > 
>> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:29:09PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:27:44AM -0800, Pezza wrote:
>> >> > 
>> >> > Pasi,
>> >> > 
>> >> > thanks for your reply.
>> >> > 
>> >> > I understood from this and other mailing lists that using an HVM
>> >> machine
>> >> > with no PV drivers would result in a poor performance, but it would
>> >> work
>> >> > anyway.
>> >> > My problem is that, due to this packet loss, HVM machines are not
>> >> usable,
>> >> > because they get some "strange" errors from time to time (session
>> >> breaks,
>> >> > corrupt files, etc...).
>> >> > So you're saying that lack of PV drivers is the cause and thus that
>> HVM
>> >> > machines are not stable if we don't use PV drivers?
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> >> Basicly, yes.
>> >> 
>> >> HVM domU hardware emulation (NIC, disk controller, etc) is done by
>> QEMU
>> >> in
>> >> Xen.
>> >> 
>> >> QEMU people can possibly tell you more about expected performance and
>> >> problems.
>> >> 
>> >> And I bet you can find many comparisons with some googling..
>> performance
>> >> with and without PV drivers in HVM domU.
>> >> 
>> > 
>> > Btw same happens with VMware.. if you don't install "vmware tools"
>> > (=optimized drivers) you're limited to 10 Mbit/sec networking etc..
>> > 
>> > -- Pasi
>> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/XEN---Broadcom-issue%3A-survey-tf4798603.html#a13762635
Sent from the Xen - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


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