From Fedora Project Wiki

< FWN‎ | Beats

 
(220 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
{{Anchor|Virtualization}}
 
{{Anchor|Virtualization}}
 +
  
 
== Virtualization ==
 
== Virtualization ==
In this section, we cover discussion on the @et-mgmnt-tools-list, @fedora-xen-list, @libvirt-list and @ovirt-devel-list of Fedora virtualization technologies.  
+
In this section, we cover discussion of Fedora virtualization technologies on the
 +
@fedora-virt list.
  
 
Contributing Writer: [[User:Dale | Dale Bewley]]
 
Contributing Writer: [[User:Dale | Dale Bewley]]
 
=== Enterprise Management Tools List ===
 
This section contains the discussion happening on the
 
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools et-mgmt-tools list]
 
 
====  ====
 
<references />
 
  
 
=== Fedora Virtualization List ===
 
=== Fedora Virtualization List ===
Line 19: Line 14:
 
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-virt fedora-virt list].
 
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-virt fedora-virt list].
  
==== ====
+
==== Virt Status Report ====
<references />
+
[[JustinForbes|Justin Forbes]]
 +
posted<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-December/msg00056.html</ref> a Fedora virtualization status report.
 +
Justin pointed out F13 bugs<ref>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_bugs</ref> now include Important and Pony classifications in addition to Blocker and Target.
  
=== Fedora Xen List ===
 
This section contains the discussion happening on the
 
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen fedora-xen list].
 
 
====  ====
 
 
<references />
 
<references />
  
=== Libvirt List ===
+
==== RHEL and Fedora Virtualization Feature Parity ====
This section contains the discussion happening on the
+
Robert Day wondered how the virtualization features<ref>http://www.redhat.com/virtualization/rhev/</ref> of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list libvir-list].
+
compared to Fedora 12.
  
==== Xen PCI Device Passthrough ====
+
[[DanielBerrange|Daniel Berrange]]
A patch<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2009-March/msg00270.html</ref> from
+
explained<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-December/msg00040.html</ref>
[[DanielBerrange| Daniel P. Berrange]]
+
"The KVM based virtualization in RHEL-5.4 is not nearly so far behind
"provides initial support for PCI device passthrough in
+
Fedora as you might think. The {{package|libvirt}} mgmt stack in RHEL-5.4 was
Xen, at time of boot. It does not (yet) implement device hotplug
+
rebased to be near parity with [[Releases/11|Fedora 11]], and KVM in RHEL-5.4 is
for PCI".
+
also pretty close to that using what's best described as a hybrid of
"XenD only supports 'unmanaged' PCI devices - ie mgmt app is responsible
+
kvm-83 and kvm-84."
for detaching/reattaching PCI devices from/to host device drivers.
 
XenD itself won't automatically do this".
 
  
 
<references />
 
<references />
  
==== Secure Guest Migration Draft Patch ====
 
[[ChrisLalancette|Chris Lalancette]]
 
followed<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2009-March/msg00276.html</ref>
 
the RFC<ref>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue166#Secure_Guest_Migration_Between_Hosts</ref>
 
of last week with a "rough first draft of the secure migration code" and sought comments on the approach before putting the final polish on it.
 
  
[[DanielVeillard|Daniel Veillard]]
+
====  ====
wasn't enitrely satisfied<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2009-March/msg00338.html</ref>
+
<references />
with the "costs related to the 64KB chunking imposed by the XML-RPC" and was
 
"Trying to reopen a bit the discussion we had before on opening a
 
separate encrypted connection".
 
Daniel Veillard
 
"would like to make sure we have room in the initial phase
 
to add such a negociation where an optimal solution" on a dedicated TCP/IP
 
connection "may be attempted, possibly falling back to a normal XML-RPC solution".
 
 
 
[[DanielBerrange|Daniel Berrange]]
 
pointed<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2009-March/msg00341.html</ref> out
 
"This isn't XML-RPC. This is our own binary protocol using XDR encoding,
 
which has very little metadata overhead - just a single 24 byte header
 
per 64kb of data.", and poposed a 'MIGRATION_INCOMING' message which could
 
cause <code>libvirted</code> to "switch the TCP channel to 'data stream' mode."
 
 
 
[[ChrisLalancette|Chris Lalancette]]
 
tested the migration code and found the draft secure migration caused a
 
"slowdown of between 1.5 and 3 times".
 
"What I'm going to do early next week is do some additional work to try to get
 
DanB's suggestion of the STREAM_DATA RPC working.  Then I'll try benchmarking
 
(both for duration, and CPU usage)".
 
  
 +
====  ====
 
<references />
 
<references />

Latest revision as of 18:09, 18 December 2009



Virtualization

In this section, we cover discussion of Fedora virtualization technologies on the @fedora-virt list.

Contributing Writer: Dale Bewley

Fedora Virtualization List

This section contains the discussion happening on the fedora-virt list.

Virt Status Report

Justin Forbes posted[1] a Fedora virtualization status report. Justin pointed out F13 bugs[2] now include Important and Pony classifications in addition to Blocker and Target.

RHEL and Fedora Virtualization Feature Parity

Robert Day wondered how the virtualization features[1] of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4 compared to Fedora 12.

Daniel Berrange explained[2] "The KVM based virtualization in RHEL-5.4 is not nearly so far behind Fedora as you might think. The Package-x-generic-16.pnglibvirt mgmt stack in RHEL-5.4 was rebased to be near parity with Fedora 11, and KVM in RHEL-5.4 is also pretty close to that using what's best described as a hybrid of kvm-83 and kvm-84."