From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Bader Subject: Correct format for HVM graphics Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:08:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4F7C63EE.6000703@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2804023548070912317==" Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Stefano Stabellini Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --===============2804023548070912317== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig797120CC2D607A79DD1B76DA" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig797120CC2D607A79DD1B76DA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stefano, quite a while back in time, you and Konrad had a discussion about some HV= M setup problems via libvirt. One part was graphics and the problem seemed to be = that when creating a new instance through xend for HVM, the use of vfb was wro= ng. It mostly does work but then also defines a vkbd which takes a long time in = the xenbus setup to finally fail. Because this was not a really fatal problem it did take a long time to ac= tually get back to it. But now I had a look and found that libvirt indeed does u= se the vfb form for both the xen-xm and xen-sxpr formats (the latter being used = to create guests). The decision is made based on the xend version number in = the HVM case. Which would be wrong if I did understand your reply correctly. I have been testing a patch to libvirt, which would not use a vfb definit= ion whenever HVM is used (regardless of xend version). And it does seem to wo= rk (xm list -l however has a vfb device definition, but the same happens when cr= eating the instance with a xm style config file that definitely has no vfb secti= on in it). But I am testing based on our 12.04 release which uses Xen 4.1.2. So= I want to make sure the solution for libvirt is correct for even the current Xen= version. So in short, is this always correct? if (HVM or (PVM when xend is from xen < 3.0.4 / xend version < 3)) do not define a vfb device else /* PVM and xend version >=3D 3 */ define a vfb device Thanks, Stefan --------------enig797120CC2D607A79DD1B76DA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJPfGP3AAoJEOhnXe7L7s6jmVQQAKFN3BolPllZECJvY9wH31J8 NSIiZ9/Wgv9IqIC6beDX6Wo3kEVvRmY5P4ca9Gjl7YfnL6iUuUXDcv7nQy5Ap9JE gQl2Nqsmbyt2GIonohzu2KEg8vkNjIbegRAVc36UF/fspE+ccMySftjhRdLKxKxe brcrMc1BA0jdHvrQ1P1ksaTdRMDWQsgkEhysrhfQX7dITx6eonFAWUe+rwJSJvHo 8vXP2tPMxJlAmS76w/Oo4FemIM0NxV+Lqd8Hm5tU2H7NHTerXiDN/kPPuGOOJ03M XgAXkylqiSNgiZh0QjdSaHakNzivugLbOFYWRKQwr4or8R/vsB++aQha+THWfExY x7XTLIWLaQ91FJKt5JPtESuyTN3GxhTODmNTbbakq/ZAwZ39fYDMnEkvXbR6Tozg smNb/CghTJCeU2UMVPf5hPt8rGBdIggxJd1By1a43SuWpmexoxTYlGy2w9KEkO/q 64Jfu3tVY02zwQoA61E+1f6HWQhRrhXHyJf+T6jI5VoIMBLmrgFsYW2cpKV27MUM vCW9YZe4Buze+2VRfrqtLqaerpSKTvvoVFEMcXJSBrFS/ECgbMlTTVAi0YfcFrAA 4JjglurARjQ4xbUyur4bgcec1epR/U9/1IuhkS+368ecUOvuF8IOff6+Y1LULt/1 nRaPXPGAZ40hdMek4X9Y =GaUG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig797120CC2D607A79DD1B76DA-- --===============2804023548070912317== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============2804023548070912317==--