KVM Management : Paravirtualized Guests

KVM Management : Paravirtualized Guests

[jd]

Hi
 
 1.  How to help customers migrate from Xen PV images, to using KVM (with PV support) ?

 2.  Would appreciate any suggestions on making PV support easily available to users. Something we can do to work around, requirements of kernel version > 2.6.25, making virt_io drivers available. Are there pre-built kernels needed/available somewhere ?
 
     From recent posts it seems that direction is not to use PV for memory.. does this mean that now one can use any kernel and needs virt_io drivers ? Can some one help explain the state and direction in this area.

Thanks
/Jd



      

Re: KVM Management : Paravirtualized Guests

[Anthony Liguori]

jd wrote:
> Hi
>  
>  1.  How to help customers migrate from Xen PV images, to using KVM (with PV support) ?
>   

You have two choices.  Xenner[1] or doing a v2v conversion.

[1] http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/

>  2.  Would appreciate any suggestions on making PV support easily available to users. Something we can do to work around, requirements of kernel version > 2.6.25, making virt_io drivers available. Are there pre-built kernels needed/available somewhere ?

Source is available for older Linux kernels on the KVM downloads page.  
You'll have to provide binaries yourself.

>  
>      From recent posts it seems that direction is not to use PV for memory..

I don't know what it means to use "PV for memory".

>  does this mean that now one can use any kernel and needs virt_io drivers ? Can some one help explain the state and direction in this area.
>   

I don't understand this question either.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Thanks
> /Jd
>
>
>
>       
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>   

Re: KVM Management : Paravirtualized Guests

[Amit Shah]

* On Saturday 09 Aug 2008 21:20:51 Anthony Liguori wrote:
> jd wrote:

> >      From recent posts it seems that direction is not to use PV for
> > memory..
>
> I don't know what it means to use "PV for memory".

Guess he means not using PV-based MMU operations in favour of using 
hardware-assisted translations.

To answer OP's question, yes, using EPT or NPT is definitely better.

Amit.