Xen 3.0.0 released!

Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Ian Pratt]

Folks,

Now seems a good time to call a Xen 3.0.0 release!  We've been seeing
good stability on the XenRT regression tests for the last couple of
weeks, and the number of bug reports submitted to bugzilla have
dropped right down. It's time to get a bigger group of people to start
beating up on it...

mercurial source: http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-3.0-testing.hg

Along with the usual binary install tarball, we've created a new
live-iso demo CD, and some RPM packages for common linux
distros. Among the RPM downloads are 'xen-friendly' glibc packages.
See http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads

[Please use the Torrent versions if you can; http downloads require
email registration so we can control server load over the next few
days.]

I expect we'll be spinning fixes to the 3.0 series fairly frequently
over the next few weeks. You'll be able to find the very latest
updates by pulling source from the 3.0-testing.hg tree, or using the
nightly builds. 

For the next few weeks, the xen-unstable.hg tree will be used to test
further releases in the 3.0.x series (we'll checkin the version of
linux 2.6.14 that has xen as a sub-arch that's currently sitting in
linux-2.6-xen.hg), before forking off to become the 3.1 development
branch once things have settled down on 3.0.

As usual, please send those bug reports to the mailing lists and
bugzilla!

Best,
Ian

Re: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Michael Holzt]

> Now seems a good time to call a Xen 3.0.0 release!

The source code download tar.gz seems to disagree, as it contains an
'xen-unstable' directory. You probably want to change that :-)

Regards
Michael

-- 
      It's an insane world, but i'm proud to be a part of it. -- Bill Hicks

RE: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Cihula, Joseph]

Ian,

For those of us working on bug fixes for the 3.0.x releases, how would
you like us to submit the patches?  One against 3.0-testing.hg and
another against xen-unstable.hg?

Joseph Cihula
(Linux) Software Security Architect
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corp.

*** These opinions are not necessarily those of my employer ***

On Monday, December 05, 2005 4:58 AM,  Ian Pratt <> wrote:

> Folks,
> 
> Now seems a good time to call a Xen 3.0.0 release!  We've been seeing
> good stability on the XenRT regression tests for the last couple of
> weeks, and the number of bug reports submitted to bugzilla have
> dropped right down. It's time to get a bigger group of people to start
> beating up on it...
> 
> mercurial source: http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-3.0-testing.hg
> 
> Along with the usual binary install tarball, we've created a new
> live-iso demo CD, and some RPM packages for common linux
> distros. Among the RPM downloads are 'xen-friendly' glibc packages.
> See http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads
> 
> [Please use the Torrent versions if you can; http downloads require
> email registration so we can control server load over the next few
> days.]
> 
> I expect we'll be spinning fixes to the 3.0 series fairly frequently
> over the next few weeks. You'll be able to find the very latest
> updates by pulling source from the 3.0-testing.hg tree, or using the
> nightly builds.
> 
> For the next few weeks, the xen-unstable.hg tree will be used to test
> further releases in the 3.0.x series (we'll checkin the version of
> linux 2.6.14 that has xen as a sub-arch that's currently sitting in
> linux-2.6-xen.hg), before forking off to become the 3.1 development
> branch once things have settled down on 3.0.
> 
> As usual, please send those bug reports to the mailing lists and
> bugzilla!
> 
> Best,
> Ian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

RE: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Ian Pratt]

 
> > Now seems a good time to call a Xen 3.0.0 release!
> 
> The source code download tar.gz seems to disagree, as it 
> contains an 'xen-unstable' directory. You probably want to 
> change that :-)

Oops, probably worth updating that to be at least "xen-3.0-testing". 

Thanks,
Ian
 

RE: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Ian Pratt]

> For those of us working on bug fixes for the 3.0.x releases, 
> how would you like us to submit the patches?  One against 
> 3.0-testing.hg and another against xen-unstable.hg?

I think its best off sending patches against unstable, for us to cherry
pick into testing.

Thanks,
Ian
 
> Joseph Cihula
> (Linux) Software Security Architect
> Open Source Technology Center
> Intel Corp.
> 
> *** These opinions are not necessarily those of my employer ***
> 
> On Monday, December 05, 2005 4:58 AM,  Ian Pratt <> wrote:
> 
> > Folks,
> > 
> > Now seems a good time to call a Xen 3.0.0 release!  We've 
> been seeing 
> > good stability on the XenRT regression tests for the last couple of 
> > weeks, and the number of bug reports submitted to bugzilla have 
> > dropped right down. It's time to get a bigger group of 
> people to start 
> > beating up on it...
> > 
> > mercurial source: http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-3.0-testing.hg
> > 
> > Along with the usual binary install tarball, we've created a new 
> > live-iso demo CD, and some RPM packages for common linux distros. 
> > Among the RPM downloads are 'xen-friendly' glibc packages.
> > See http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads
> > 
> > [Please use the Torrent versions if you can; http downloads require 
> > email registration so we can control server load over the next few 
> > days.]
> > 
> > I expect we'll be spinning fixes to the 3.0 series fairly 
> frequently 
> > over the next few weeks. You'll be able to find the very latest 
> > updates by pulling source from the 3.0-testing.hg tree, or 
> using the 
> > nightly builds.
> > 
> > For the next few weeks, the xen-unstable.hg tree will be 
> used to test 
> > further releases in the 3.0.x series (we'll checkin the version of 
> > linux 2.6.14 that has xen as a sub-arch that's currently sitting in 
> > linux-2.6-xen.hg), before forking off to become the 3.1 development 
> > branch once things have settled down on 3.0.
> > 
> > As usual, please send those bug reports to the mailing lists and 
> > bugzilla!
> > 
> > Best,
> > Ian
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 

RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Ian Pratt]

> I've had 3.0-unstable debs prepared for awhile now; hadn't 
> uploaded them, for several reasons:
> 
> 1) xen-unstable required a 2.6.12 base kernel; this no longer 
> exists in
>    debian, so it wasn't possible for me to build-depend on 
> it, so I could
>    create a standard unified-diff.

Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)
 
> 2) vif-route.sh is buggy; it doesn't handle the case where 
> multiple adapters
>    exist.  So, dom0_ip(and the functions it calls) ends up 
> returning 2 ip
>    addresses, which makes ifconfig complain.
> 
>    I've got a fix hot-patched on our deployed server, I'll be 
> sending that
>    soon.

Please post it, thanks.
 
> 3) It appeared that when I tried the final 3.0.0 release, 
> that xenstored was
>    very sick.  I had a previous(20051116 snapshot) installed, 
> and the tdb file
>    was corrupted(sorta).  xenstore-list / shows to local 
> paths, but no vm nor
>    tools.  Removing the file 'fixed' this.  I'm not certain 
> exactly what
>    happend, tho.

It's possible that the install scripts should delete the database when
performing an upgrade. I don't think there have been any format changes
in a while, though.

> 5) I see it's not possible to have both a xen microkernel 
> that supports both
>    pae and non-pae.  For individuals who are compiling 
> themselves, that's
>    fine; they can select which they want.

Yep, no real way round that. Most users are already trained to this
thanks to it being a compile time option in Linux.
 
>    Also, what other options are available, that would require multiple
>    compiles?  Also, I don't see a concise list of what config 
> options I can
>    tweak for xen itself; the documentation is a bit poor in 
> that regard(pae
>    isn't even mentioned in the documentation; you have to 
> read a separate
>    README).

Having a debug/verbose build of xen is sometimes handy for debugging
things, but since debug builds are deliberatly combatitive its probably
not a good idea for production. 

Ian

RE: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Paul Dorman]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2486 bytes --]

And then there's the linux-2.6-xen.hg no PTYs problem I've asked about
previously. Selecting Xen subarchitecture nukes 90% of the device
drivers section. Consequently I can't get a shell running on 2.6.14 domu
machines. I've asked about this before but no-one seems to have an
answer for me.

Paul

On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 21:32 +0000, Ian Pratt wrote:
> Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
> hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)
>  
> > 2) vif-route.sh is buggy; it doesn't handle the case where 
> > multiple adapters
> >    exist.  So, dom0_ip(and the functions it calls) ends up 
> > returning 2 ip
> >    addresses, which makes ifconfig complain.
> > 
> >    I've got a fix hot-patched on our deployed server, I'll be 
> > sending that
> >    soon.
> 
> Please post it, thanks.
>  
> > 3) It appeared that when I tried the final 3.0.0 release, 
> > that xenstored was
> >    very sick.  I had a previous(20051116 snapshot) installed, 
> > and the tdb file
> >    was corrupted(sorta).  xenstore-list / shows to local 
> > paths, but no vm nor
> >    tools.  Removing the file 'fixed' this.  I'm not certain 
> > exactly what
> >    happend, tho.
> 
> It's possible that the install scripts should delete the database when
> performing an upgrade. I don't think there have been any format changes
> in a while, though.
> 
> > 5) I see it's not possible to have both a xen microkernel 
> > that supports both
> >    pae and non-pae.  For individuals who are compiling 
> > themselves, that's
> >    fine; they can select which they want.
> 
> Yep, no real way round that. Most users are already trained to this
> thanks to it being a compile time option in Linux.
>  
> >    Also, what other options are available, that would require multiple
> >    compiles?  Also, I don't see a concise list of what config 
> > options I can
> >    tweak for xen itself; the documentation is a bit poor in 
> > that regard(pae
> >    isn't even mentioned in the documentation; you have to 
> > read a separate
> >    README).
> 
> Having a debug/verbose build of xen is sometimes handy for debugging
> things, but since debug builds are deliberatly combatitive its probably
> not a good idea for production. 
> 
> Ian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

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

Re: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Michael Holzt]

> Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
> hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)

I'm currently trying to build a debian kernel package out of
linux-2.6-xen.hg but the build fails. It seems that 'make bzImage' is
nonfunctional on linux-2.6-xen.hg but does not give any error. So only the
modules are compiled and then kernel package fails because it can't locate
the (not built) kernel.



Regards
Michael

-- 
      It's an insane world, but i'm proud to be a part of it. -- Bill Hicks

RE: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Adam Heath]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Ian Pratt wrote:

> Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
> hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)

We do, but the new way I'll be packaging the source doesn't require any kernel
source in debian.  Whatever xen ships, will be in the xen deb.

I'd prefer to only use real releases; if I have multiple xen versions, then it
becomples complex with file overlaps and dependencies and parallel installs.

And, even then, it's not hard to see a point in the future where a new linux
kernel comes out, but xen-stable(3.0) doesn't upgrade to it, and then the
source I do require gets removed.  My new way gets rid of all of these
problems, and makes the local admin get the kernel source his own way.

> > 2) vif-route.sh is buggy; it doesn't handle the case where
> > multiple adapters
> >    exist.  So, dom0_ip(and the functions it calls) ends up
> > returning 2 ip
> >    addresses, which makes ifconfig complain.
> >
> >    I've got a fix hot-patched on our deployed server, I'll be
> > sending that
> >    soon.
>
> Please post it, thanks.

In vif-common.sh, ip_of should be this:
==
function ip_of()
{
  ip addr show "$1" | awk "/^.*inet.*$1\$/{print \$2}" | sed 's,/.*,,'
}
==

Sorry it's not in diff form, I just pasted what is on our production server.

> > 3) It appeared that when I tried the final 3.0.0 release,
> > that xenstored was
> >    very sick.  I had a previous(20051116 snapshot) installed,
> > and the tdb file
> >    was corrupted(sorta).  xenstore-list / shows to local
> > paths, but no vm nor
> >    tools.  Removing the file 'fixed' this.  I'm not certain
> > exactly what
> >    happend, tho.
>
> It's possible that the install scripts should delete the database when
> performing an upgrade. I don't think there have been any format changes
> in a while, though.

Well, not delete.  Maybe dump to a text form, then reimport.

> > 5) I see it's not possible to have both a xen microkernel
> > that supports both
> >    pae and non-pae.  For individuals who are compiling
> > themselves, that's
> >    fine; they can select which they want.
>
> Yep, no real way round that. Most users are already trained to this
> thanks to it being a compile time option in Linux.

That's true, but the xen hypervisor is not compiled by users; it's built once,
and installed thru a deb.

> >    Also, what other options are available, that would require multiple
> >    compiles?  Also, I don't see a concise list of what config
> > options I can
> >    tweak for xen itself; the documentation is a bit poor in
> > that regard(pae
> >    isn't even mentioned in the documentation; you have to
> > read a separate
> >    README).
>
> Having a debug/verbose build of xen is sometimes handy for debugging
> things, but since debug builds are deliberatly combatitive its probably
> not a good idea for production.

Then that sounds like a candidate for xen-debug.deb.

Re: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Adam Heath]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Michael Holzt wrote:

> > Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
> > hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)
>
> I'm currently trying to build a debian kernel package out of
> linux-2.6-xen.hg but the build fails. It seems that 'make bzImage' is
> nonfunctional on linux-2.6-xen.hg but does not give any error. So only the
> modules are compiled and then kernel package fails because it can't locate
> the (not built) kernel.

make-kpkg kernel-image --arch=xen

This will change the targets make-kpkg calls, namely, it won't call bzImage.

Re: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Michael Holzt]

> make-kpkg kernel-image --arch=xen
> This will change the targets make-kpkg calls, namely, it won't call bzImage.

Nope, in linux-2.6-xen.hg there is no longer an architecture xen. Your
command fails.


Regards
Michael

-- 
      It's an insane world, but i'm proud to be a part of it. -- Bill Hicks

Re: Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Adam Heath]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Michael Holzt wrote:

> > make-kpkg kernel-image --arch=xen
> > This will change the targets make-kpkg calls, namely, it won't call bzImage.
>
> Nope, in linux-2.6-xen.hg there is no longer an architecture xen. Your
> command fails.

Oh, then the support in make-kpkg needs to be tweaked, to take a
--subarch=xen.

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.0.0 released!

[Ewan Mellor]

On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 04:36:11PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:

> > > 2) vif-route.sh is buggy; it doesn't handle the case where
> > > multiple adapters
> > >    exist.  So, dom0_ip(and the functions it calls) ends up
> > > returning 2 ip
> > >    addresses, which makes ifconfig complain.
> > >
> > >    I've got a fix hot-patched on our deployed server, I'll be
> > > sending that
> > >    soon.
> >
> > Please post it, thanks.
> 
> In vif-common.sh, ip_of should be this:
> ==
> function ip_of()
> {
>   ip addr show "$1" | awk "/^.*inet.*$1\$/{print \$2}" | sed 's,/.*,,'
> }
> ==

Applied, thanks.

Ewan.

Re: [Xen-users] RE: Xen 3.0.0 released / cannot select device drivers

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:40:17AM +1300, Paul Dorman wrote:
> And then there's the linux-2.6-xen.hg no PTYs problem I've asked about
> previously. Selecting Xen subarchitecture nukes 90% of the device
> drivers section. Consequently I can't get a shell running on 2.6.14 domu
> machines. I've asked about this before but no-one seems to have an
> answer for me.
> 

Was this issue resolved? 

I'm seeing the same problem with linux-2.6-xen.hg .. 

- Pasi Kärkkäinen


> Paul
> 
> On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 21:32 +0000, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > Do you have 2.6.14? You could build based on linux-2.6-xen.hg, but this
> > hasn't has s much testing (we know of at least on issue on x86_64)
> >  
> > > 2) vif-route.sh is buggy; it doesn't handle the case where 
> > > multiple adapters
> > >    exist.  So, dom0_ip(and the functions it calls) ends up 
> > > returning 2 ip
> > >    addresses, which makes ifconfig complain.
> > > 
> > >    I've got a fix hot-patched on our deployed server, I'll be 
> > > sending that
> > >    soon.
> > 
> > Please post it, thanks.
> >  
> > > 3) It appeared that when I tried the final 3.0.0 release, 
> > > that xenstored was
> > >    very sick.  I had a previous(20051116 snapshot) installed, 
> > > and the tdb file
> > >    was corrupted(sorta).  xenstore-list / shows to local 
> > > paths, but no vm nor
> > >    tools.  Removing the file 'fixed' this.  I'm not certain 
> > > exactly what
> > >    happend, tho.
> > 
> > It's possible that the install scripts should delete the database when
> > performing an upgrade. I don't think there have been any format changes
> > in a while, though.
> > 
> > > 5) I see it's not possible to have both a xen microkernel 
> > > that supports both
> > >    pae and non-pae.  For individuals who are compiling 
> > > themselves, that's
> > >    fine; they can select which they want.
> > 
> > Yep, no real way round that. Most users are already trained to this
> > thanks to it being a compile time option in Linux.
> >  
> > >    Also, what other options are available, that would require multiple
> > >    compiles?  Also, I don't see a concise list of what config 
> > > options I can
> > >    tweak for xen itself; the documentation is a bit poor in 
> > > that regard(pae
> > >    isn't even mentioned in the documentation; you have to 
> > > read a separate
> > >    README).
> > 
> > Having a debug/verbose build of xen is sometimes handy for debugging
> > things, but since debug builds are deliberatly combatitive its probably
> > not a good idea for production. 
> > 
> > Ian
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-users] RE: Xen 3.0.0 released / cannot select device drivers

[Vincent Hanquez]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:42:31PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> Was this issue resolved? 
> 
> I'm seeing the same problem with linux-2.6-xen.hg .. 

http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-merge/2006-01/msg00085.html

-- 
Vincent Hanquez

Re: [Xen-users] RE: Xen 3.0.0 released / cannot select device drivers

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:40:49PM +0100, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:42:31PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > Was this issue resolved? 
> > 
> > I'm seeing the same problem with linux-2.6-xen.hg .. 
> 
> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-merge/2006-01/msg00085.html
> 

Thanks!

I wonder why this patch is not in the repo..

-- Pasi