virt

virt@lists.centos.org

1608 discussions

Re: [CentOS-virt] p2v conversion questions
by Sven Kieske 12 May '14

12 May '14

And here is the link: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/virtio-win/ Am 12.05.2014 12:58, schrieb Itamar Heim: > On 05/06/2014 10:52 AM, Sven Kieske wrote: >> Quickly scanning some of the files I found some GPLed >> and some under a weird IBM license (which allows redistribution). >> >> I didn't find anything which does not permit redistribution. >> Maybe you can point me in the right direction? >> >> CC'ing Itamar who can maybe give some insight into virtio-win >> licenses. >> > > I don't remember the specifics on this one, but the virtio-win drivers > (available on alt.fedoraproject.org) can be freely redistributed. > >> Am 06.05.2014 14:56, schrieb me(a)tdiehl.org: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Mon, 5 May 2014, Sven Kieske wrote: >>> >>>> Am 03.05.2014 22:32, schrieb SilverTip257: >>>>> Per the RH docs, a RHN subscription is necessary for the virtio-win >>>>> package. >>>> >>>> well the ovirt-project[1] >>>> will provide this package "soon" (tm). >>>> >>>> meanwhile you could try the following: >>>> (this is a quote from the ovirt-users ML) >>>> >>>>> download the src rpm from >>>>> http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHOS/SRPMS/ >>>>> build the rpm >>>>> rpmbuild --rebuild virtio-win-1.6.8-4.el6.src.rpm >>>>> install the rpm >>>>> rpm -Uhv ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/virtio-win-1.6.8-4.el6.noarch.rpm >>>> >>>> I didn't test it myself, so I don't know if it really works, but >>>> "it should" (ymmv). >>> >>> That is what I was looking for. I never thought to look there. Thank >>> you. >>> >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.ovirt.org >>>> >>>> PS: ovirt is the upstream project of red hat enterprise virtualization >>>> it would be cool to see some integration work with the centos virt sig! >>> >>> I agree that would be nice but as I read the license, it cannot be >>> redistributed. Obviously, Red Hat can do as they wish, since it is >>> already >>> on the ovirt site. I wonder if they will extend that to CentOS? >>> >>> OTOH, it is trivial to build the rpm, so I am not sure it is worth >>> putting >>> lot of effort into it. The hard part was finding the src.rpm and that >>> was only >>> hard because I was looking in the wrong place. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >> > > > > -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Sven Kieske Systemadministrator Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG Königsberger Straße 6 32339 Espelkamp T: +49-5772-293-100 F: +49-5772-293-333 https://www.mittwald.de Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen

1 0

VMs failing to restart
by Lars Hecking 09 May '14

09 May '14

This is a problem I've had on and off under CentOS5 and CentOS6, with both xen and kvm. Currently, it happens consistently with kvm on 6.5, e.g. with every kernel update. I *think* it generally worked fine with the 6.4 kernels. There are 7 VMs running on a 6.5, x86_64, 8GB RAM host, each with 512MB RAM and using the e1000 NIC. I picked this specific NIC because the default does not allow reliable monitoring through SNMP (IIRC). The host has two bonded NICs with br0 running on top. When the host reboots, the VMs will generally hang bringing up the virtual NIC, and I need to go through several iterations of destroy/create, for each VM, to get them running. The always hang here (copy&paste from console): ... Welcome to CentOS Starting udev: udev: starting version 147 piix4_smbus 0000:00:01.3: SMBus Host Controller at 0xb100, revision 0 e1000: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - version 7.3.21-k8-NAPI e1000: Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Intel Corporation. ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKC] enabled at IRQ 11 e1000 0000:00:03.0: PCI INT A -> Link[LNKC] -> GSI 11 (level, high) -> IRQ 11 e1000 0000:00:03.0: eth0: (PCI:33MHz:32-bit) 00:16:3e:52:e3:0b e1000 0000:00:03.0: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection Any suggestions on where to start looking?

4 9

p2v conversion questions
by me＠tdiehl.org 06 May '14

06 May '14

Hi, I am in the process of converting a w2k8 physical server to C6.5 kvm. In reading https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux… It says that virtio-win rpm is required. I know that the virtio-win rpms are not available for Centos 6.5 but the drivers are available for download at https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/virtio-win/latest/images/bin/ My question is does any have anyone have any documentation that shows where I should put the virtio-win drivers in order to get a successful migration? Is there any better documentation that I should use to get the migration done? I have been googling all afternoon with no real progress. Some old threads I have found seem to indicate that /usr/share/virtio-win is the correct place but those threads are from 2011. I need to do the migration tomorrow and I would like to be as prepared as possible. Regards, -- Tom me(a)tdiehl.org Spamtrap address me123(a)tdiehl.org

5 8

Actions and IRC log from May 6th VIRT SIG meeting
by Lars Kurth 06 May '14

06 May '14

Hi all, I summarized actions on http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status tagged with 06/05 The meeting LOG is below Regards Lars lars_kurth How do you want to run this? We have a set of lose ends: the roadmap via http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003763.html <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003763.html> kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> if someone (lars?) wants to just do it point by point we can run through those. lars_kurth And some open actions: http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status <http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status> kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there is a 60 min hard stop at the end jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> hi all lars_kurth How about the following: Actions first, then George can do the roadmap? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok, works for me lars_kurth Do we all have http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status <http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status> up? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i do gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> yep pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep lars_kurth kbsingh: there were 3 technical items on you. I know you and hughesjr and gwd had a conversation kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i believe gwd is setup with the basic workflow, and has git access lars_kurth last week. Is there anything that can be ticked off in the technical category? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we only imported the main xen repo at this point, but if things are looking ok and if the process is something we can work with - i cna go ahead and import the rest of the repos gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> So it's imported into git.centos.org? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> humm lars_kurth kbsingh: what would the URL be? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> https://git.centos.org/project/sig-virt <https://git.centos.org/project/sig-virt> kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> is where it should come up on lars_kurth definitely there kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> right, so the blocker was how are we going to organise the git repos on github - are we going to setup some teams at the project level or the repos level kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010175.html <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010175.html> is the conversation kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i dont believe we all got to a result there. lars_kurth Do we need to reply to this thread? lars_kurth Or is this more general? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well you had asked about having a different org for each sig, and Karsten said that sounded reasonable. gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Is there any reason not to give that a try for now? lars_kurth Can we close this now. Or do we just have an action to engage with the discussion? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I can reply to the thread. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there are a couple of threads that fall out from this kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> eg. where is the kernel going to be maintained - and is every sig that needs a kernel then going to need to maintain the entire thing kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> or can we just have a single git repo, with sig's maintaining their own branches hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> I see a meeting in progress ...cool lars_kurth hughesjr: hi. A little painful on IRC, but welcome lars_kurth kbsingh: does sounds like a centos-wide decision that needs to be made. I propose to take an action for gwd and me to replay to the respective threads. gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Is there really a difference? Isn't that the point of DVCS? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: for the sake of convenience, I'd say maybe we just trial the model of having everything under /CentOS/ and if or when we run into a problem, we can try to change things around gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's certainly a lot easier to begin with. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok lars_kurth ok.Cool: I made a note kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lets take that away then as a todo gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: So you're going to clone all the repos into git.centos.org and github.com/CentOS/ ? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I've replied to the thread as well lars_kurth Added as new action. Gwd may need to tidy up if I misunderstood kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: yeah, I can go ahead and do that as well - not online right now, but it can be done today lars_kurth IS: KaranbirSingh to put together list of repository names in Xen4CentOS such that we can use it as a baseline - still open? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> yes kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> that should get resolved with the move lars_kurth Alright. Move to Community? lars_kurth My list policy item is still open gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What was the list policy question? I forget. lars_kurth And we were discussing whether kbsingh wanted to attend the Hackathon. I will need to know pretty soon, as we are running out of space lars_kurth gwd: just send a reminder to people that posting to the list while not subscribed = mail discarded lars_kurth Do we want to keep this, or change it? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I do want to come to the hackathon gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> discard> got it. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i believe there is some libvirt people as well ? lars_kurth OK. In that case, I will reserve a space and add you to the wiki lars_kurth Yes. Daniel Berrage lars_kurth As well as some other Xen folks working on libvirt gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> jonludlam: Do you know who from the XenServer team is coming? lars_kurth Let me check jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> dave scott jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> me jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> not sure about others jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> euanh, do you know? euanh <ircs://freenode/euanh,isnick> I'm hoping to come lars_kurth http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Hackathon/May2014#Confirmed_attendees <http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Hackathon/May2014#Confirmed_attendees> gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> jonludlam: For this meeting, knowing that you & dave are coming is sufficient I think. lars_kurth jonludlam: you are signed up euanh <ircs://freenode/euanh,isnick> don't know about others jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> David Vrabel and Andrew Cooper on that list gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: You have an outstanding item to e-mail the -virt mailing list. Are you planning on doing that? Does it make sense to do so if there are only a handful of places left? lars_kurth kbsingh: OK, I will add a few more people as provisional to the list. I only have 40 spaces and all of the remaining 8 are waiting for travel approval, visas, etc. (including kbsingh in the lars_kurth kbsingh: will send instructions to sign you up fully kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there was also some word from ovirt guys kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i dont know if they have someone local - but they dont have xen support lars_kurth kbsingh: I need to know ASAP who that would be, if they want to get a space kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok, i can ping around lars_kurth kbsingh: great pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> iirc ovirt had some sort of Xen support in the beginning pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> and then later they switched to "kvm only" gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Hopefully with the improved libvirt support, getting xen support back in should be straightforward. lars_kurth pasik: I was copied on a thread which says that integrating ovirt with xen+libvirt may be non-trivial as ovirt makes assumptions underneath libvirt pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: yep gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Shall we put that as another agenda item and finish going through the actions? lars_kurth there are no quick fixes. I would say let's get libvirt support better first and then look at next steps pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: agreed lars_kurth gwd: How about adding it to longer term roadmap goals gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: We can certainly have a wishlist -- the question is who's going to do the work. lars_kurth gwd: I will add an action on you to create a roadmap wiki page. Is that OK? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: Ack. lars_kurth gwd: good question. I think wishlist = looking for a volunteer lars_kurth OK. The last set of open actions was Publicty lars_kurth The state of play was that we got the centos board feedback, made fixes and reported back to Karsten lars_kurth Karsten still has to ACK lars_kurth I asked for Advisory Board approval on the assumption that he would do so lars_kurth So the blocking issue is for the centos board to ACK lars_kurth kbsingh: can you take this on or chase Karsten? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lars_kurth: i can ping him lars_kurth thanks. Tracked everything lars_kurth gwd: over to you pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> 28 minutes until kbsingh needs to go lars_kurth as an aside: how do I get the IRC logs for this channel? lars_kurth gwd: I think we are all looking at http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003765.html <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003765.html> and responses gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Roadmap> I sent out a mail with a basic discussion of what we talked about two weeks ago; I don't think there were any additions or objections lars_kurth Do we have any disagreements / open questions in this thread? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> So I'll make a concrete to-do list and post it on a wiki page. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> cool gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I think one thing kbsingh suggested is that we want to have most of the basic stuff sorted out before RHEL 7 comes out in... what, June / July? jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> Not sure if this is the right time to bring this up, but I was wondering about bumping the version of ocaml used when building xen pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> I think the current xen4.2 rpms are built against ocaml3 jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> yep pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> and there was/is the dev repo against ocaml4 aswell jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> I think at some point in xen4centos's history, there was ocaml4 in there pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What happened with that? I don't know any of the histyr pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so first we need to get the xen 4.4 rpms built, probably against ocaml4 pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: what happened is hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> this issue is it breaks everything else ocaml in the distro jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> yes pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: we just decided to go with the "distro stock ocaml3" because xapi stuff wasn't done yet jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> ocaml is incredibly picky about versions gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Not used to being enterprise yet, I take it... hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> that means, we have to take on also fixing other distro things hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> that are ocaml pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so do we want to first build xen 4.4 again ocaml3 ? jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> right, unless there's a way for things to co-exist pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> +st hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> jonludlam: I suppose we can do an SCL for xen stuff gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> ...and there's no way to have both versions somehow, and have each package use the library it needs? jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> recent version of ocaml are much happier about coexisting with other versions hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: if we do ocaml4 as an SCL that would work .. now if we can is another issue jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> hughesjr, would the SCL _contain_ xen then? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What does SCL stand for? hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> software collections jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> == coexistence of different versions of things DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> missed the libvirt/xen discussion earlier gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Software CoLlection. Nice. pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> xen 4.4.0 src.rpm (for fedora 21) here: ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/developme… <ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/developme…> gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: kbsingh showed me how the basic CentOS build system works, so I'm going to try doing the 4.4 update once the repos are sorted out. lars_kurth DV: I don't think we had a specific discussion before gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> (Maybe after doing a more minor update as a test first.) DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> lars_kurth: just a few excahnge on IRC ^^^ pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: that sounds good gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> OK, so can we update to 4.4, then update libvirt, and look into doing ocaml for Xen as an SCL? hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: that sounds like a good plan lars_kurth gwd: I guess the question is which libvirt version jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> How would an SCL work if xen depends upon it? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Are there any other package updates we need to do? pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so the first iteration of xen 4.4 rpms would be built against ocaml3, so there's an upgrade path from xen 4.2 rpms ? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: On the list we decided 1.2.3, the same as Ubuntu 14.04. (Or maybe it was 1.2.2 -- whichever one Ubuntu is using). DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> lars_kurth: what is in Fedora 20 get backports, but it's a bit 'old' already gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: We seem to be talking about libvirt now -- did you have a comment / question / concern? DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> lars_kurth: I think whatever version of libvirt is in ubuntu 14.04 LTS is a good starting point (seriously :D) gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> libvirt 1.2.2 it was, I think. DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: mostly watching, and seeing if there is pit to avoid lars_kurth We could agree on this for now and decide to upgrade later (after the Hackathon discussion) gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: Well we're planning on updating to libvirt 1.2.2, and then maybe backporting important functionality (such as live migration). pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> too bad el7 looks to have libvirt 1.1.1 DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> notes other SIGs may want libvirt updates without becoming over zealous might be worth checking around to minimize builds gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: Noted. Know of any that we should coordinate with? DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> pasik: usually in RHEL there is a lot of backports, so base version not always a good indicator lars_kurth DV, kbsingh: do you have any visibility to what other SIG's need? If not, we should maybe poll on the centos-devel list kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lars_kurth: yes, and no kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i think we should deliver something, anything, just ship it gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I think going forward, all changes / pull requests will be posted to the centos-virt list, so any specific change can be objected to when it actually gets submitted. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> that gives people a target to point at DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> kb kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> otherwise we might get into masive wish lists DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> kbsingh, if other sigs are not more advanced, ACk gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: That sounds like a plan. lars_kurth kbsingh: works for me pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> DV: yep kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> yeah, i thin kthe virtsig is perhaps the best place at the moment gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> If kbsingh / hughesjr have their fingers in other sigs, they can bring us in when we need to start coordinating about something. lars_kurth Works for me. So we agreed to start with 1.2.2? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's what we talked about on the -virt list, and nobody has objected. pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> let's do what ubuntu 14.04 lts has; so libvirt 1.2.2 lars_kurth Just confirming for the minutes. Agreed then. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> 1.2.2 works for me, if - (1) we have qemu rbd supported for both ceph and gluster ( libfgfacl ) DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> there have been a lot of libxl updates in 1.2.3, but you know better what you need pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> from earlier.. did we agree to build the first xen 4.4 rpms against ocaml3, so the current users of el6 xen 4.2 rpms can upgrade smoothly ? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> pasik: if we didnt, then we should kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> hughesjr: ^ ? ocaml3 ? pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> DV: those libxl updates need to be backported jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, does the ocaml version have much bearing on the upgrade? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Should we move the really technical discussion to the mailing list? lalatenduM <ircs://freenode/lalatenduM,isnick> kbsingh, I think libvirt 1.2.3 has few imp bug fixes for gluster DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> pasik: and lot of code churn in 1.2.3, this may not be that easy lars_kurth How about, we m pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> hmm kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lalatenduM: in that case, maybe we should consider 1.2.3 gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well if backporting is too hard, we can think about moving forward instead. lars_kurth we propose 1.2.2 on the list and ask for any backports necessary (pointing to patches) kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> how about we decide on a 1.2.x and take the conversation to the lists to decide pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so then let's move to 1.2.4 directly? hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> well .. if we maintai the same major version as ubuntu, things will work better in both places and we can more easily reuse code gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> libvirt said they would do maintenance updates for any downstream actively using it; I think CentOS would be big enough to be worth their consideration. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> given DV has an eye on libvirt, what do you think ? DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> Indent top-level labels by one space in ... Use K&R style for curly braces in ... that kind of patches goes in the way of backports hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> we can do whatever you guys want ... but centos is not intended to be fedora gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Going with 1.2.2 was just an attempt to reduce the burden on upstream. DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> but hard to tell a priori if it really will make it hard DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> <gwd> Well if backporting is too hard, we can think about moving forward instead. : that's reasonable gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well let's look at 1.2.2 and try a few backports and see how it works. DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> ack lars_kurth Agreed. Will add an action on gwd pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: about ocaml version: like said the current xen 4.2 rpms are built against ocaml3, and if xen 4.4 rpms added ocaml4 as a requirement, then all the distro ocaml stuff would break in the xen 4.2 -> xen 4.4 upgrade.. I don't think we want to do that. pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: so I'd say let's first build xen 4.4 against ocaml3; and then let's figure out the SCL stuff so we can properly do xen 4.4 with ocaml4 jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, they shouldn't be run-time requirements DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> used to assemble RHEL libvirt builds for too long, some reflexes persists gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> One thing we might want to talk about (maybe on the -devel list) is changing the "binary blob" thing in the CentOS build system to make it earier to collaborate with people who don't have access to the "blob repo" (sorry I don't know the proper terms for these things) pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: lookasides or something gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: I'd much rather learn the easy way, from your experience, than the hard way, from my own. jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, btw, no problem starting with ocaml3 with a view to seeing how ocaml4 might turn out pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: ok lars_kurth Anything else we need to discuss? DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: TBH the libvirt team use to rebase frequently, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 ... because code changes fast and want to minimize backport loads kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: ok, if you start that off, we can hash it out ( the lookaside thing ) gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Most of the blobs in Xen4Centos seem to be upstream tarballs. One option would be to have a URL of the upstream, with a local cache to make builds reliable. lars_kurth We have 2 minutes: I would propose to raise loose ends after the meeting on the list kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: i guess people can still checkout and do local things, and the get_sources.sh could be injected into the git repo itself DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: that said being 0.0.2 behind means only 2 months, should be okay pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: I was able to do custom local rebuilds of centos src.rpms; I used the get_sources.sh kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i am guessing there isnt a LTS sort of version - so we'd need a plan to keep things patched without needing a system update every 2 months gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: The hard part would be pull requests. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> do we have any other major points on the agenda pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: true kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: pasik: pull requests on binary data will always be against ( or well, used to be against ) a new srpm kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> so we just run the import pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: I think we should write something about ocaml version gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I don't think so -- I'll kick off a discussion on -virt about packages to update gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> And make a roadmap wiki kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> but we can also have remote urls in the .package.metadata file - and people can request merges against that jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> I believe there's been some discussion before about the structure of the xen rpms - is that minuted anywhere? jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> ^^+1 DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: my suggestions, use git, cherry pick from upstream into a set of commit bringing what you want on top of your branch, use that as you patch list lars_kurth pasik, jonludlam: no - can I get you to make a proposal on the list kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> jcpunk: +1 to what jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> looking for documented structure jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> of rpms DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: see the libvirt rpms from Fedora or RHEL they should be largely explicit kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> this was on the virt list ages ago. we essentially went with the carry-in-spec for the leaf nodes needed at build time. gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: That seems reasonable. jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> kbsingh: ah, got it kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i suspect jonludlam is talking about the entire wider scope pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: yeah sure, jonludlam is probably the expert with ocaml stuff lars_kurth OK: will add action jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> right, interested in splitting dom0 rpms from domU, etc kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> jonludlam: i dont think we've had that conversation at this point. but we should jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> ok, perhaps next meeting then? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> if we dont have any other items, i just want to bring one in - and this is past the scheduled hour, but worth talking about lars_kurth Maybe next time or on list? jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> gotta run to another meeting now gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: I'm fairly new to RPM building: I take it there's a step where you explicitly export base..tip as a series of patches? gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: I've got time. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we have a bit of a problem with el7rc kernel not doing pv out of the blocks gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's not as a guest, right? pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: only redhat kernel team can do something about that.. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> when i say a bit of a problem - i mean this is a major train crash kind of problem, given how much of hosting and cloud is pv only pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: redhat disabled xen pv support for el7 kernel DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: yes you can ask git to give them a name based on commit text, and in the rpm spec you list them in order pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: (xen hvm is still supported) kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> pasik: right, i dont care about the rhel7 state of play, but we might need to do something in the centos ecosystem and own it locally pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: yep, definitely we should "fix" that for centos7 kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: it is.. as a guest, cant run rhel7 as a pv guest. only hvm-pv and hvm ( ofcourse ) kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I will get the git repos in place and the acl's setup this week for the xen stuff to happen gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: Oh, that's right. But does it have PVHVM support? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> and we can maybe target a 4.4 build as a testing/qa process. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: yes. pvhvm works gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: So are you thinking of having a CentOS guest kernel that supports PV? pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so probably just a small .config tweak hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: well, we will have a kernel that supports dom0 too at some point DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: git log --pretty=%f -1 your-commit and use that as a base for the filename of the associated patch kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: i dont know - dont want to predecide and havent really spent any time thinking this though - but i do know that we need to ( spend the time, think it through, do something ) kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> o, lars_kurth are we calling this meting closed ? ( i am already on the phone waiting for the next one to open ) pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: yes, i think we should have some kernel variant with "fixed" .config gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Would the PV kernel be basically the same as the Xen4CentOS dom0? Or a stripped-down version? Or were you thinking of taking the upstream RH kernel and re-enabling PV (meaning another separate kernel branch to maintain)? lars_kurth yes: let's call it closed pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: i think it should upstream-el7-kernel with just the .config tweak hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: we can do more than one if we want hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> (or need to) pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: and any xen pv specific patches, if there's a need for those ever pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: so maintenance-wise it would be quite low effort.. hopefully gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: Well, one would hope... gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> And would that be a change to the main CentOS kernel? Or a separate package that's included for cloud targets? kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> change to main kernel would need quite a major reason, and a lot of shouting and requests - I suspect we dont/wont get that initially. kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we could carry it on the install media though... so its available to use right off the bat, post install ( specially if its the same version as the install / main kernel ) gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That sounds pretty do-able. pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> OK -- lars_kurth, are you going to send out a meeting report? lars_kurth gwd: pointing to the actions and appending this log for now

1 1

Cant boot a image
by mattias 06 May '14

06 May '14

Ii took a gzipped image And use gunzip to extract it But now i cant boot! Fdisk shows no partition table

3 7

BAD disk I/O performance
by Luca Gervasi 05 May '14

05 May '14

Hello, i'm trying to convert my physical web servers to a virtual guest. What i'm experiencing is a poor disk i/o, compared to the physical counterpart (having strace telling me that each write takes approximately 100 times the time needed on physical). Tested hardware is pretty good (HP Proliant 360p Gen8 with 2xSAS 15k rpm 48 Gb Ram). The hypervisor part is a minimal Centos 6.5 with libvirt. The guest is configured using: VirtIO as disk bus, qcow2 storage format (thick allocation), cache mode: none (needed for for live migration - this could be changed if is the bottleneck), IO mode: default. Is someone willing to give me some adivices? :) Thanks Luca

4 3

Pages In and Read Sectors in Guest Domain
by Deron 29 Apr '14

29 Apr '14

Hello. I have been doing some performance tests with Xen and CentOS and have found some strange statistics when comparing the virtual memory (/proc/vmstat) and I/O (/proc/diskstat) statistics between the Domain 0 and guests. When I look at the "pgpgin" statistic it is exactly the same as the "read sectors" in Dom0. However, when I look at the same statistics in the guest, the "read sectors" is exactly 2x "pgpgin". I have tried this on 2 different versions, each on a different physical server. Here is an example of the statistics over a 30 second period (while running a benchmark in Dom1) in the Dom0 and Guest Domain. pgpgin read sectors ======= ========= Dom0 1698024 1698024 Dom1 848412 1696824 I have looked at some various settings to see if I could explain it. I can't tell if the Dom1 guest kernel is reporting incorrectly, or there is some other explanation. If anyone has any ideas about this I would appreciate any feedback. Dom 0 kernels 3.10.29-11.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 3.4.54-8.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 Guest kernel 2.6.32-431.el6.x86_64 Thanks, Deron

2 2

Virt SIG roadmap
by George Dunlap 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

As promised, in preparation for next week's SIG meeting, here's a kick-off discussion about the Virtualization SIG roadmap. I'm mainly tossing out ideas here -- see this is an invitation to discussion. Key things I think should be on the roadmap: * Release process - General cadence - Estimate of the next release (if any) * Specification of targets - Right now, mainly xen4centos - What packages? * "Backlog" of work items - Updates (mostly suggested by Pasi) - Items caveats from Russ P's CentOS talk == Release process == I don't have any real opinions on this -- KB / Johnny, did you guys have a vision for what the release schedule for any of the SIGs would look like? Are we going to have specific releases, or just continue to do rolling updates? If so, how frequent should the updates be? Obviously estimates for releases will need to wait until all the infrastructure has been set up, and we've discussed cadence / targets, &c. == Targets == Targets will depend on community support. I'll be committing to extending the Xen4CentOS project. There was talk of having an OpenVZ variant, but that would require someone to actually step up and do the work to integrate and support it. == Backlog == Most of the items below are from the discussion Pasi started in February; a couple are from Russ Pavliczek's slides at a talk given recently. * Pull in updates f/ XenServer > Suggested by dvrabel in http://marc.info/?l=centos-virt&m=139289353315469 - 0001-x86-xen-rename-early_p2m_alloc-and-early_p2m_alloc_m.patch - 0008-x86-remove-the-Xen-specific-_PAGE_IOMAP-PTE-flag.patch - 0160676bba69523e8b0ac83f306cce7d342ed7c8 (xen/p2m: check MFN is in range before using the m2p table) - 7cde9b27e7b3a2e09d647bb4f6d94e842698d2d5 (xen: Fix possible user space selector corruption) * Xen 4.4 (Xen + qemu) * libvirt: 1.2.2 - Possibly with migration / pci pass-through back-ported? * dom0 / xen serial console * Ballooning bug? > http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6893 * UEFI? Anything else we need to discuss / plan? -George

3 5

libvirt versions / difference to upstream?
by Sven Kieske 22 Apr '14

22 Apr '14

Hi, I want to upgrade my libvirt version, in order to get a bugfix from upstream, see this BZ for details: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084477 in short: libvirt does not handle qos correctly prior to version 0.10.2-33.el6 however, it is not (yet?) available in CentOS. The latest available package seems to be: libvirt-0.10.2-29.el6_5.7.x86_64 Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is it just the versioning scheme that differs between CentOS and upstream? Or did the new rpm just not hit the repo yet? Thanks in advance! PS: This is CentOS 6.5 -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Sven Kieske Systemadministrator Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG Königsberger Straße 6 32339 Espelkamp T: +49-5772-293-100 F: +49-5772-293-333 https://www.mittwald.de Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen

2 1

AWS Images updated for new instance types
by Karanbir Singh 22 Apr '14

22 Apr '14

hi, · CentOS 6.3 (x86_64) – Release Media: https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/B00A6L6F9I · CentOS 6.4 (x86_64) – Release Media: https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/B00DGYP804 are now marked for and updated to run with the m3 and c3 instance types. I'm still working with the amazon crew to get the 6.5 images online and an automated pipeline proposed ( hopefully, also adopted ) to get this image injection speeded up in the future. Regards -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

2 6

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

virt