[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] PV drivers for HVM guests



Agreed.  What I meant is that it would be nice if the device model
were modified to have better performance for things like OS/2, where
writing paravirtual drivers would be less emphasized.

Peace.
Andrew

Ky Srinivasan wrote:
Andrew,

The I/O performance of HVM guests with PV drivers is SIGNIFICANTLY better than 
what we get without PV drivers. I will post the patches after some additional 
testing and code cleanup.

Regards,

K. Y


On Tue, Oct 3, 2006 at  6:19 PM, in message

<1159913996.27206.37.camel@localhost>, "Andrew D. Ball" <aball@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Interesting!  Ideally, there would be better performance in the base HVM
device model.  I think I know of some people that are working hard on
that.

I'm curious to see what you've done for (1) and (2).

Peace.
Andrew

On Tue, 2006-  10-  03 at 16:31 -  0400, Ky Srinivasan wrote:

I am trying to build PV drivers for SLES9 HVM guests. SLES 9 is based on the

2.6.5 kernel. Since the PV driver code is really designed for the latest kernel release, I have had many issues/problems in building the PV drivers for older Linux OS targets - I have only been looking at the issues with 2.6.5 kernel base and I suspect the problem will be even worse if one were to look at older Linux kernels. This is unfortunate since PV drivers are so critical for HVM guests and there is considerable interest in supporting legacy Linux environments as HVM guests. The problems I have had to deal with can be broadly classified into:

a) Compiler related issues
b) Missing functionality in the legacy kernel - this includes features as

well as changed data structures

c) Implementation differences of a given feature

These differences can be dealt with in a couple of different ways:
1) Modify the code in the PV drivers under appropriate compilation switches

to deal with the differences in the base kernels.

2) Introduce a compatibility component that bridges the gap between the

current PV code and a given Linux target and leave much of the PV driver code untouched.

I have implemented both these schemes for the sles9 kernel and would like to

get your input on your preference. I personally like option 2. Going forward, the evolution of PV drivers needs to be constrained by the required support for legacy Linux environments.
Regards,

K. Y. Srinivasan




_______________________________________________
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




_______________________________________________
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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.