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-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] New feature support - xl or xm ?

To: "Vincent, Pradeep" <pradeepv@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] New feature support - xl or xm ?
From: "Vincent, Pradeep" <pradeepv@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 16:37:01 -0700
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: Ian, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dulloor <dulloor@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:38:17 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C83416F8.17B7F%pradeepv@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcsG66EMTQW2LzrZSKaaztIoo2w3NQAcS8OxAAGrhPw=
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] New feature support - xl or xm ?

Also, was there a compelling reason to move away from the ‘xm’ interface. Obviously ‘xm’ is both an API and an implementation and I certainly see the reasons to move away from libxenguest/xend/xm implementation in favor of libxl. But was there a reason to opt for a new ‘xl’ API as opposed change the implementation behind the established ‘xm’ API.

Did the ‘xm’ interface (excluding the implementation) fall short of serving the needs ?

Thanks,

- Pradeep Vincent

On 6/8/10 3:49 PM, "Vincent, Pradeep" <pradeepv@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Thanks Stefano.

>>I think that migrating VMs from 'xm hosts' to 'xl hosts' would
> work even at the moment, if you use xl on both source and destination
> hosts


I am not sure what you meant here – Are you suggesting retrofit of Oxl’ to
hosts using older hypervisor.

Can migration functionality (including live migration) in Oxl’ be designed
for backward compatibility with Oxm’. I am sure this will go a long way in
helping existing users convert over to Oxl’.

- Pradeep Vincent



On 6/8/10 2:17 AM, "Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Vincent, Pradeep wrote:
>> I haven’t looked deeply into Oxl’ but..
>>
>>> From the recent Xen summit, I walked away thinking Oxl’ didn’t have the
>>> callback mechanisms (e.g. Cleanup etc) and this
>> helped it stay stateless while falling short of full Oxm’ replacement. This
>> email thread indicates Oxm/xend’ will be
>> deprecated in due course of time. Did I miss anything here ?
>>
>
> We intend to port xend to libxl at some point to smooth the migration
> path, however xl is going to be where most of the development and
> testing is going on, so it is worth considering a switch to xl in any
> case.
> xl does have the callback mechanisms for cleanup, they are implemented
> in a per-VM daemon that is started when you create the domain.
> However you can still create a VM without starting the related daemon
> (no callbacks or cleanups in that case).
>
>
>> Is migration of VMs from Oxm’ managed hosts to Oxl’ managed hosts expected to
>> work ?
>>
>> I think moving away from commonly used xend/xm could be a bit of a thorn
>> particularly if the Oxm’ to Oxl’ migration isn’t
>> expected to work.
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>
> There are only two things that xl doesn't have compared to xend: the
> concept of managed domains (domains that are installed on your system
> and may be offline) and an XML-RPC interface.
> If you don't need these two things than switching shouldn't be
> difficult.
> I think that migrating VMs from 'xm hosts' to 'xl hosts' would
> work even at the moment, if you use xl on both source and destination
> hosts and specify the configuration file you used to create the domain
> at the source. In any case it could be made to work without too many
> efforts, given that your are not speaking about fully managed domains.
>


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

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