From Fedora Project Wiki

< FWN‎ | Beats

(add headers for libvirt ovirt et-mgt-tools lists)
 
(507 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Virtualization]] <!-- do not copy into FWN issue -->
{{Anchor|Virtualization}}
{{Anchor|Virtualization}}


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


In this section, we cover discussion of Fedora virtualization features.
Contributing Writer: [[User:Dale | Dale Bewley]]


Contributing Writer: [[DaleBewley | Dale Bewley]]
=== Fedora Virtualization List ===
 
This section contains the discussion happening on the
=== Enterprise Management Tools List ===
[http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-virt fedora-virt list].
This section contains the discussion happening on the [https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools et-mgmt-tools list]
 
=== Fedora Xen List ===
 
This section contains the discussion happening on the [https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen fedora-xen list].
 
==== kernel-xen is dead ====
[[MarkMcLoughlin|Mark McLoughlin]] wrote[1] to say the <code>kernel-xen</code> package is dead. Which is to say <code>kernel</code> can now support x86 and x86_64 domU guests and <code>kernel-xen</code> will be dropped from Rawhide.
 
Hiding between those lines is the fact that there is no Dom0 kernel. Without which a domU must be booted via a [[Features/XenPvops paravirt_ops]] kernel or with KVM-based xenner.
 
The conversation then turned to the matter of migrating away from Xen and support for systems without hardware virtualization.
 
So, [[PaulWouters|Paul Wouters]] asked[2] if there was a howto for migration to KVM. It seemed there is not.
 
[[AlainWilliams|Alain Williams]] realized that Fedora 9 [[Docs/Beats/Virtualization  has no Dom0 support]] after installing it. When he asked why [[MarkMcLoughlin|Mark McLoughlin]] pointed[3] out the problems with <code>kernel-xen</code> being based on a much older kernel than <code>kernel</code> creating a time sink, so the decision was made to rebase to the upstream kernel which supports paravirt_ops. This decision was first announced[4] back in Nov 2007 by [[DanielBerrange | Daniel P. Berrange]].
 
[[MarkMcLoughlin|Mark McLoughlin]] also stated[3] that Dom0 support at F10 launch looks unlikely. Fortunately we have a more positive news on that front below.
 
[[DaleBewley|Dale Bewley]] bemoaned[5] the fact that he has no budget to upgrade to HVM capable hardware and will have to stick on F8 until F10 has Dom0 support.
 
[[StephenSmoogen|Stephen Smoogen]] pointed[6] out that RHEL5 and CentOS5 are options for Dom0 on non-HVM hardware. [[DanielBerrange|Daniel Berrange]] expressed[7] some empathy and the desire for such support, but reitterated it isn't viable until Dom0 is ported to pv_ops.
 
[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00044.html
 
[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00046.html


[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00048.html
==== Virt Status Report ====
[[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.


[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2007-November/msg00106.html
<references />


[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00049.html
==== RHEL and Fedora Virtualization Feature Parity ====
Robert Day wondered how the virtualization features<ref>http://www.redhat.com/virtualization/rhev/</ref> of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4
compared to Fedora 12.


[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00052.html
[[DanielBerrange|Daniel Berrange]]
explained<ref>http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-December/msg00040.html</ref>
"The KVM based virtualization in RHEL-5.4 is not nearly so far behind
Fedora as you might think. The {{package|libvirt}} mgmt stack in RHEL-5.4 was
rebased to be near parity with [[Releases/11|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."


[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00053.html
<references />


==== State of Xen in upstream Linux ====


[[PasiKärkkäinen|Pasi Kärkkäinen]] thoughtfully forwarded[1] a long detailed xen kernel status message which was sent to the xen-devel list by [[JeremyFitzhardinge|Jeremy Fitzhardinge]]. Jeremy pointed out that mainline kernel is at 2.6.27-rc1 and his current patch stack is pretty much empty after being merged into linux-2.6.git.
====  ====
<references />


Jeremy reitterated the fact that Fedora 9's kernel-xen package was based on the mainline kernel even though it is a separate package, and now that kernel-xen has been dropped from rawhide Fedora 10 will have only one kernel package. Jeremy said his focus in the next kernel development window will be dom0 support with the hope it will be merged into 2.6.28.
==== ====
 
<references />
[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00058.html
 
=== Libvirt List ===
This section contains the discussion happening on the [https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list libvir-list].
 
=== oVirt Devel List ===
This section contains the discussion happening on the
[https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ovirt-devel ovirt-devel list].

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.

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-December/msg00056.html
  2. ↑ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_bugs

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 libvirt 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."

  1. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/virtualization/rhev/
  2. ↑ http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-virt/2009-December/msg00040.html



Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=FWN/Beats/Virtualization&oldid=142485"