Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[George Dunlap]

This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
 http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3

A couple of notes:

- I have updated the timeline to include a description of my proposed
criteria for accepting patches going forward.  Feedback is welcome.

- As we focus on getting a release for the 4.3 codebase, I have
removed items from the list that are either "not for 4.3" or are
purely external (e.g., Linux kernel or libvirt).

- Please start suggesting bug reports to put on this list.

= Timeline =

We are planning on a 9-month release cycle.  Based on that, below are
our estimated dates:
* Feature freeze: 25 March 2013
* Code freezing point: 8 April 2013
* First RC: 6 May 2013
* Release: 17 June 2013

The RCs and release will of course depend on stability and bugs, and
will therefore be fairly unpredictable.  Each new feature will be
considered on a case-by-case basis; but the general rule will be as
follows:

* Between feature freeze and code freeze, only features which have had
a v1 posted before the feature freeze, or are on this list, will be
considered for inclusion.

* Between the "code freezing point" and the first RC, any new code
will need to be justified, and it will become progressively more
difficult to get non-bugfix patches accepted.  Critera will include
the size of the patch, the importance of the codepath, whether it's
new functionality being added or existing functionality being changed,
and so on.

Last updated: 18 March January 2013

= Feature tracking =

Below is a list of features we're tracking for this release. Please
respond to this mail with any updates to the status.

There are a number of items whose owners are marked as "?".  If you
are working on this, or know who is working on it, please respond and
let me know.  Alternately, if you would *like* to work on it, please
let me know as well.

And if there is something you're working on you'd like tracked, please
respond, and I will add it to the list.

NB: Several of the items on this list are from external projects:
linux, qemu, and libvirt.  These are not part of the Xen tree, but are
directly related to our users' experience (e.g., work in Linux or
qemu) or to integration with other important projects (e.g., libvirt
bindings).  Since all of these are part of the Xen community work, and
comes from the same pool of labor, it makes sense to track the
progress here, even though they won't explicitly be released as part
of 4.3.

Meanings of prognoses:
- Excellent: It would be very unlikely for this not to be finished in time.
- Good: Everything is on track, and is likely to make it.
- Fair: A pretty good chance of making it, but not as certain
- Poor: Likely not to make it unless intervention is made
- Not for 4.3: Self-explanatory

== Completed ==

* Serial console improvements
  -EHCI debug port

* Default to QEMU upstream (partial)
 - pci pass-thru (external)
 - enable dirtybit tracking during migration (external)
 - xl cd-{insert,eject} (external)

* CPUID-based idle (don't rely on ACPI info f/ dom0)

* Persistent grants for blk (external)
 - Linux
 - qemu

* Allow XSM to override IS_PRIV checks in the hypervisor

* Scalability: 16TiB of RAM

* xl QXL Spice support

== Bugs ==

* xl, compat mode, and older kernels
  owner: ?
  Many older 32-bit PV kernels that can run on a 64-bit hypervisor with
  xend do not work when started with xl.  The following work-around seems to
  work:
    xl create -p lightning.cfg
    xenstore-write /local/domain/$(xl domid
lightning)/device/vbd/51713/protocol x86_32-abi
    xl unpause lightning
  This node is normally written by the guest kernel, but for older kernels
  seems not to be.  xend must have a work-around; port this work-around to xl.

* AMD NPT performance regression after c/s 24770:7f79475d3de7
  owner: ?
  Reference: http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=135075376805215

* qemu-upstream: cd-insert and cd-eject not working
  http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=135850249808960

* Install into /usr/local by default
  owner: Ian Campbell

== Not yet complete ==

* PVH mode (w/ Linux)
  owner: mukesh@oracle
  status (Linux): 3rd draft patches posted.
  status (Xen): RFC submitted
  prognosis: Tech preview only

* Event channel scalability
  owner: wei@citrix
  status: RFC v5 submitted
  prognosis: Good
  Increase limit on event channels (currently 1024 for 32-bit guests,
  4096 for 64-bit guests)

* ARM v7 server port
  owner: ijc@citrix
  prognosis: Excellent
  status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.

* ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
  owner: ijc@citrix
  status: ?
  prognosis: Tech preview only

* NUMA scheduler affinity
  critical
  owner: dario@citrix
  status: Patches posted
  prognosis: Excellent

* NUMA Memory migration
  owner: dario@citrix
  status: in progress
  prognosis: Fair

* Default to QEMU upstream
 > Add "intel-hda" to xmexample file, since it works with 64-bit Win7/8
 - qemu-based stubdom (Linux or BSD libc)
   owner: anthony@citrix
   status: in progress
   prognosis: ?
   qemu-upstream needs a more fully-featured libc than exists in
   mini-os.  Either work on a minimalist linux-based stubdom with
   glibc, or port one of the BSD libcs to minios.

* Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0)
  owner: jan@suse
  status: not started
  prognosis: Fair

* vTPM updates
  owner: Matthew Fioravante @ Johns Hopkins
  status: some patches submitted, more in progress
  prognosis: Good
  - Allow all vTPM components to run in stub domains for increased security
  - Update vtpm to 0.7.4
  - Remove dom0-based vtpmd

* V4V: Inter-domain communication
  owner (Xen): dominic.curran@citrix.com
  status (Xen): patches submitted
  prognosis: Fair
  owner (Linux driver):  stefano.panella@citrix
  status (Linux driver): in progress

* xl PVUSB pass-through for PV guests
* xl PVUSB pass-through for HVM guests
  owner: George
  status: ?
  prognosis: Fair
  xm/xend supports PVUSB pass-through to guests with PVUSB drivers
(both PV and HVM guests).
  - port the xm/xend functionality to xl.
  - this PVUSB feature does not require support or emulation from Qemu.
  - upstream the Linux frontend/backend drivers. Current
work-in-progress versions are in Konrad's git tree.
  - James Harper's GPLPV drivers for Windows include PVUSB frontend drivers.

* xl USB pass-through for HVM guests using Qemu USB emulation
  owner: George
  status: Config file pass-through submitted.
  prognosis: Good
  xm/xend with qemu-traditional supports USB passthrough to HVM guests
using the Qemu emulated USB controller.
  The HVM guest does not need any special drivers for this feature.
  So basicly the qemu cmdline needs to have:
     -usb -usbdevice host:xxxx:yyyy
  - port the xm/xend functionality to xl.
  - make sure USB passthrough with xl works with both qemu-traditional
and qemu-upstream.

* xl: passing more defaults in configuration in xl.conf
  owner: ?
  There are a number of options for which it might be useful to pass a
  default in xl.conf.  For example, if we could have a default
  "backend" parameter for vifs, then it would be easy to switch back
  and forth between a backend in a driver domain and a backend in dom0.

* Remove hardcoded mobprobe's in xencommons
  owner: ?
  status: ?
  prognosis: Poor.

* openvswitch toostack integration
  owner: ?
  prognosis: Poor
  status: Sample script posted by Bastian ("[RFC] openvswitch support script")
  - See if we can engage Bastian to do a more fully-featured script?

* Rationalized backend scripts
  owner: roger@citrix
  status: libxl hotplug sumbmitted.  Protocol still needs to be finalized.
  prognosis: Good

* Scripts for driver domains (depends on backend scripts)
  owner: roger@citrix
  status:
  prognosis: Fair

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Ian Campbell]

On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:

> == Bugs ==
[...]
> * Install into /usr/local by default
>   owner: Ian Campbell

Possibly not strictly speaking a "bug"?

IMHO this is ready to go in and just needs review of the two patches in
<1360081162.23001.31.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>.

The other wrinkle is that this is my last day in the office for a few
weeks, so even with the review I'd be reluctant to just throw it in a
FRO out of the country without a backup who is at least willing to
revert on disaster if not actually fixup any issues discovered in
testing.

> == Not yet complete ==

> * ARM v7 server port
>   owner: ijc@citrix
>   prognosis: Excellent
>   status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.
> 
> * ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
>   owner: ijc@citrix
>   status: ?
>   prognosis: Tech preview only

There are a few outstanding patch series and there may be other stuff
which comes along but what is in tree now for v7 and v8 is in pretty
good shape I think.

So I think we could reasonably call these done for 4.3. Stefano what do
you think?

Ian.

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> 
> > == Bugs ==
> [...]
> > * Install into /usr/local by default
> >   owner: Ian Campbell
> 
> Possibly not strictly speaking a "bug"?
> 
> IMHO this is ready to go in and just needs review of the two patches in
> <1360081162.23001.31.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>.
> 
> The other wrinkle is that this is my last day in the office for a few
> weeks, so even with the review I'd be reluctant to just throw it in a
> FRO out of the country without a backup who is at least willing to
> revert on disaster if not actually fixup any issues discovered in
> testing.
> 
> > == Not yet complete ==
> 
> > * ARM v7 server port
> >   owner: ijc@citrix
> >   prognosis: Excellent
> >   status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.
> > 
> > * ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
> >   owner: ijc@citrix
> >   status: ?
> >   prognosis: Tech preview only
> 
> There are a few outstanding patch series and there may be other stuff
> which comes along but what is in tree now for v7 and v8 is in pretty
> good shape I think.
> 
> So I think we could reasonably call these done for 4.3. Stefano what do
> you think?

I think we need SMP guest support before we can call them done

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Ian Campbell]

On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:31 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > == Not yet complete ==
> > 
> > > * ARM v7 server port
> > >   owner: ijc@citrix
> > >   prognosis: Excellent
> > >   status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.
> > > 
> > > * ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
> > >   owner: ijc@citrix
> > >   status: ?
> > >   prognosis: Tech preview only
> > 
> > There are a few outstanding patch series and there may be other stuff
> > which comes along but what is in tree now for v7 and v8 is in pretty
> > good shape I think.
> > 
> > So I think we could reasonably call these done for 4.3. Stefano what do
> > you think?
> 
> I think we need SMP guest support before we can call them done

True, that would be *really* good to have.

Ian.

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[George Dunlap]

On 03/18/2013 12:31 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>> == Bugs ==
>> [...]
>>> * Install into /usr/local by default
>>>    owner: Ian Campbell
>>
>> Possibly not strictly speaking a "bug"?
>>
>> IMHO this is ready to go in and just needs review of the two patches in
>> <1360081162.23001.31.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>.
>>
>> The other wrinkle is that this is my last day in the office for a few
>> weeks, so even with the review I'd be reluctant to just throw it in a
>> FRO out of the country without a backup who is at least willing to
>> revert on disaster if not actually fixup any issues discovered in
>> testing.
>>
>>> == Not yet complete ==
>>
>>> * ARM v7 server port
>>>    owner: ijc@citrix
>>>    prognosis: Excellent
>>>    status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.
>>>
>>> * ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
>>>    owner: ijc@citrix
>>>    status: ?
>>>    prognosis: Tech preview only
>>
>> There are a few outstanding patch series and there may be other stuff
>> which comes along but what is in tree now for v7 and v8 is in pretty
>> good shape I think.
>>
>> So I think we could reasonably call these done for 4.3. Stefano what do
>> you think?
>
> I think we need SMP guest support before we can call them done

Do you think that may be ready for v7 by the time we do a code freeze? 
Will ARM v7 be *ready* in 4.3, or still be mainly a tech preview?

  -George

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 03/18/2013 12:31 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> >>
> >>> == Bugs ==
> >> [...]
> >>> * Install into /usr/local by default
> >>>    owner: Ian Campbell
> >>
> >> Possibly not strictly speaking a "bug"?
> >>
> >> IMHO this is ready to go in and just needs review of the two patches in
> >> <1360081162.23001.31.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>.
> >>
> >> The other wrinkle is that this is my last day in the office for a few
> >> weeks, so even with the review I'd be reluctant to just throw it in a
> >> FRO out of the country without a backup who is at least willing to
> >> revert on disaster if not actually fixup any issues discovered in
> >> testing.
> >>
> >>> == Not yet complete ==
> >>
> >>> * ARM v7 server port
> >>>    owner: ijc@citrix
> >>>    prognosis: Excellent
> >>>    status: Core hypervisor and Linux patches accepted.  Tools patches submitted.
> >>>
> >>> * ARM v8 server port (tech preview)
> >>>    owner: ijc@citrix
> >>>    status: ?
> >>>    prognosis: Tech preview only
> >>
> >> There are a few outstanding patch series and there may be other stuff
> >> which comes along but what is in tree now for v7 and v8 is in pretty
> >> good shape I think.
> >>
> >> So I think we could reasonably call these done for 4.3. Stefano what do
> >> you think?
> >
> > I think we need SMP guest support before we can call them done
> 
> Do you think that may be ready for v7 by the time we do a code freeze? 

Yes :)

> Will ARM v7 be *ready* in 4.3, or still be mainly a tech preview?

ready

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 18.03.13 at 13:13, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> * Multi-vector PCI MSI (support at least for Dom0)
>   owner: jan@suse
>   status: not started
>   prognosis: Fair

The hypervisor side code is written, compiles, but needs debugging
(partly dependent on me getting to write the kernel side code).

Jan

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13:40PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
>  http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3
> 
> A couple of notes:
> 
> - I have updated the timeline to include a description of my proposed
> criteria for accepting patches going forward.  Feedback is welcome.
> 
> - As we focus on getting a release for the 4.3 codebase, I have
> removed items from the list that are either "not for 4.3" or are
> purely external (e.g., Linux kernel or libvirt).
> 
> - Please start suggesting bug reports to put on this list.
> 
> = Timeline =
> 
> We are planning on a 9-month release cycle.  Based on that, below are
> our estimated dates:
> * Feature freeze: 25 March 2013
> * Code freezing point: 8 April 2013
> * First RC: 6 May 2013
> * Release: 17 June 2013
> 
> The RCs and release will of course depend on stability and bugs, and
> will therefore be fairly unpredictable.  Each new feature will be
> considered on a case-by-case basis; but the general rule will be as
> follows:
> 
> * Between feature freeze and code freeze, only features which have had
> a v1 posted before the feature freeze, or are on this list, will be
> considered for inclusion.

Based on this, I think the PVH patches and the claim user-space patches,
can be included past feature freeze right?

.. snip..
> == Not yet complete ==

The list has gotten considerebly shorter! Yeey!
> 
> * PVH mode (w/ Linux)
>   owner: mukesh@oracle
>   status (Linux): 3rd draft patches posted.
>   status (Xen): RFC submitted
>   prognosis: Tech preview only

Mukesh just posted them last Friday (wohoo!). If we are to get it in
this Friday (25 March), that is a tall order.

Can we either slip the schedule or include it under the 'Code freezing
point' - at which there is a bit more breathing room?

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[George Dunlap]

On 03/18/2013 01:39 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13:40PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
>> This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
>>   http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3
>>
>> A couple of notes:
>>
>> - I have updated the timeline to include a description of my proposed
>> criteria for accepting patches going forward.  Feedback is welcome.
>>
>> - As we focus on getting a release for the 4.3 codebase, I have
>> removed items from the list that are either "not for 4.3" or are
>> purely external (e.g., Linux kernel or libvirt).
>>
>> - Please start suggesting bug reports to put on this list.
>>
>> = Timeline =
>>
>> We are planning on a 9-month release cycle.  Based on that, below are
>> our estimated dates:
>> * Feature freeze: 25 March 2013
>> * Code freezing point: 8 April 2013
>> * First RC: 6 May 2013
>> * Release: 17 June 2013
>>
>> The RCs and release will of course depend on stability and bugs, and
>> will therefore be fairly unpredictable.  Each new feature will be
>> considered on a case-by-case basis; but the general rule will be as
>> follows:
>>
>> * Between feature freeze and code freeze, only features which have had
>> a v1 posted before the feature freeze, or are on this list, will be
>> considered for inclusion.
>
> Based on this, I think the PVH patches and the claim user-space patches,
> can be included past feature freeze right?

[snip]

> Mukesh just posted them last Friday (wohoo!). If we are to get it in
> this Friday (25 March), that is a tall order.
>
> Can we either slip the schedule or include it under the 'Code freezing
> point' - at which there is a bit more breathing room?

If you think slipping the schedule a few weeks will help us get PVH in 
as a proper feature for 4.3, I'd be in favor of it.  If it's a tech 
preview, it depends on how much it affects other non-tech-preview code.

We'll have to take a closer look when we hit the code freeze.

  -George

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Daniel Kiper]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13:40PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
>  http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3
>
> A couple of notes:
>
> - I have updated the timeline to include a description of my proposed
> criteria for accepting patches going forward.  Feedback is welcome.
>
> - As we focus on getting a release for the 4.3 codebase, I have
> removed items from the list that are either "not for 4.3" or are
> purely external (e.g., Linux kernel or libvirt).

As I saw you have removed "Xen EFI feature: Xen can boot from grub.efi".
I am working on it and now I am able to boot Xen with upstream kernel
without any changes in Xen or even in Linux Kernel. I have found workaround
(chainloader + fakebios) which works quite nice but I have not done more
tests yet. I am aware that this is not a final solution. Now I am checking
how to boot all stuff without fakebios. Later I will check is it possible
to use old good multiboot or multiboot2. It will be nice to know how this
feature is important for us in upcoming 4.3 release. Or we are going to move
this to 4.4 or apply EFI grub stuff to 4.3 as maintenance release.

Daniel

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[George Dunlap]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM, George Dunlap
<George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> * Default to QEMU upstream
>  > Add "intel-hda" to xmexample file, since it works with 64-bit Win7/8
>  - qemu-based stubdom (Linux or BSD libc)
>    owner: anthony@citrix
>    status: in progress
>    prognosis: ?
>    qemu-upstream needs a more fully-featured libc than exists in
>    mini-os.  Either work on a minimalist linux-based stubdom with
>    glibc, or port one of the BSD libcs to minios.

Anthony, how is linux stub domains coming?

And are there any other changes we need to make to be sure that
qemu-upstream is ready to be the default for 4.3?

 -George

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[George Dunlap]

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM, George Dunlap
<George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> * openvswitch toostack integration
>   owner: ?
>   prognosis: Poor
>   status: Sample script posted by Bastian ("[RFC] openvswitch support script")

James, it seemed as if you had taken a look at this at some point --
did you get anywhere?

 -George

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[James Harper]

> 
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM, George Dunlap
> <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > * openvswitch toostack integration
> >   owner: ?
> >   prognosis: Poor
> >   status: Sample script posted by Bastian ("[RFC] openvswitch support
> script")
> 
> James, it seemed as if you had taken a look at this at some point --
> did you get anywhere?
> 

I had hoped to find the time but it didn't work out unfortunately. Sorry.

James

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Wei Liu]

On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:

> * Event channel scalability
>   owner: wei@citrix
>   status: RFC v5 submitted
>   prognosis: Good
>   Increase limit on event channels (currently 1024 for 32-bit guests,
>   4096 for 64-bit guests)
> 

Just posted another RFC series. We'll have to see how it goes.


Wei.

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Dario Faggioli]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1749 bytes --]

On lun, 2013-03-18 at 12:13 +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> This information will be mirrored on the Xen 4.3 Roadmap wiki page:
>  http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Roadmap/4.3
> 
> [...]
> 
> == Not yet complete ==
>
> * NUMA scheduler affinity
>   critical
>   owner: dario@citrix
>   status: Patches posted
>   prognosis: Excellent
> 
This is mostly done. Last round received all the needed Ack-s, with only
some minor comments. I'll respin the series incorporating them ASAP, so
that it can finally get in.

We agreed on trying doing a small performance optimization before the
release... I'll see if I can get away with it quickly enough, after the
original series is checked in.

> * NUMA Memory migration
>   owner: dario@citrix
>   status: in progress
>   prognosis: Fair
> 
I'm not so sure about this anymore, I'm afraid. I'd have hoped to be in
a better spot wrt to this feature at this point but, unfortunately, I'm
still having issues with it.

I worked hard on it and am continuing doing so, and I will probably get
to release something during the rest of this week, or during the next
one. However, I'm not sure it would be wise to throw it in at this
stage... Perhaps we can make it a tech. preview?

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to keep trying, just giving an heads up
(which I probably should have done before, but, apparently, I'm still
really bad at predicting how long it will take me to find and fix
bugs! :-P)

Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

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

Re: Xen 4.3 development update, 18 March

[Roger Pau Monné]

> * Scripts for driver domains (depends on backend scripts)
>   owner: roger@citrix
>   status:
>   prognosis: Fair

I will move this to "Poor", given the imminent feature-freeze, there's
no time to design a protocol and implement it.