[CentOS-virt] Xen DomU supoprt in RHEL 7 and the CentOS Plan

Tue May 27 14:35:44 UTC 2014
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk at oracle.com>

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 01:04:21PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 23/05/14 18:58, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 03:59:14AM -1000, NightLightHosts Admin wrote:
> >> +3 XEN!
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 3:56 AM, O'Reilly, Dan <Daniel.OReilly at dish.com> wrote:
> >>> +2
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: centos-virt-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-virt-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Antony Messerli
> >>> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 7:49 AM
> >>> To: <centos-virt at centos.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] Xen DomU supoprt in RHEL 7 and the CentOS Plan
> >>>
> >>> +1 on Xen support, I haven't had time to test on RHEL yet or poke around in the kernel yet, but has all of the Xen support been removed from the kernel?
> > 
> > It has not been removed, but .. let me go in details.
> > 
> > You can boot an RHEL7 guest as PV, but there are issues:
> > 
> >  1). The FB driver has been unset (CONFIG_XEN_FBDEV_FRONTEND) that means you can
> >      still do a text-console (in theory).
> 
> Is this an interesting use case?  XenServer, for example, doesn't
> present a PV frame buffer to any PV guest and I don't recall anyone ever
> asking for it.  There are better technologies for graphical remote
> access (e.g., remote X over SSH, RDP, VNC...).

Yes it is. Folks often use 'vncviewer'.
> 
> >  3). There are also some systemd and udev things missing.
> 
> Really?  What? There shouldn't be anything extra for a pure PV guest vs
> a PVHVM guest (which RedHat do support).]

I don't know the details, John Haxby (CCed here) knows them.
> 
> David
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-virt mailing list
> CentOS-virt at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt