[OpenAFS-devel] i386_xenlinux26?

Sven Oehme oehmes@de.ibm.com
Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:17:05 +0200


This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 007A6762C125702E_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org wrote on 28/06/2005 21:43:33:

> On Jun 28, 2005, at 15:29:23, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:50:37PM -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, one of the properties of our current build system 
> >> is that
> >> for a different ${ARCH}, you have to have a different sysname.  So 
> >> our
> >> choices basically are to do a "port" with a sysname like 
> >> i386_xenlinux26
> >> (which would be consistent with how we handled UML), or wait for the
> >> cleanups of which you speak, and hope the result will be the 
> >> elimination of
> >> arch/xen in favor of a config option.
> >
> > I think it would be less trouble for everyone in the long run to wait
> > for the removal of arch/xen. If someone needs to hack up the openafs
> > build system, maybe put a patch on the openafs web site, or someother
> > place, but it probably shouldn't be put in the mainline cvs.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> >> It's worth noting that the approach used by Xen requires an 
> >> architecture
> >> with more than two privilege levels, and while i386 and its 
> >> relatives have
> >> that feature, relatively few other architectures do.  So, it may 
> >> be quite
> >> some time before we see a xen for any other architecture.
> >
> > I'm not so sure.. Even if the Xen/x86 approach requires multiple
> > priviledges, a virtualization system can work just fine using with the
> > core virtual machine code running as priviledged, and everything else
> > running upriviledged, and haveing the VM trap the 'illegal 
> > instruction'
> > handler to emulate priviledged operations. This is what Mac-on- 
> > Linux does.
> >
> > http://www.maconlinux.org/
> 
> UML uses this trick as well
> 
> > There's even a note on the xen-users list about IBM working on a 
> > Power5
> > port.
> >
> > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2005-05/ 
> > msg00433.html
> 
> The Power5 is a very different matter, because there, IIRC, Xen can use
> the hypervisor to handle most of the work.  I think IBM even has Power5
> systems that can run 2 or more copies of Linux independently, without
> _any_ virtualization software (although I could be mistaken).

yes, 
they can run up to 40 independent linuxes on a single box , it's called 
LPARing ..
i don't know any practical use (except testing) beyond 4 or 6 on a single 
box, but from the theory it works up to 40 :-)

> 
> Cheers,
> Kyle Moffett
> 
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a18 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$
> L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+
> PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ 
> r  !y?(-)
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-devel mailing list
> OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel


Mfg Sven Oehme

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dept. A153,  STG EMEA AIS Strategy and Architecture
Development Leader Open Enterprise System Virtualization 
IBM intranet ---> http://w3.ais.mainz.de.ibm.com/oesv/
Phone (+49)-6131-84-3151
Fax      (+49)-6131-84-6708
Mobil   (+49)-171-970-6664
E-Mail : oehmes@de.ibm.com

--=_alternative 007A6762C125702E_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"


<br><font size=2><tt>openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org wrote on 28/06/2005
21:43:33:<br>
<br>
&gt; On Jun 28, 2005, at 15:29:23, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt; On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:50:37PM -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; Unfortunately, one of the properties of our current build
system &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; is that<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; for a different ${ARCH}, you have to have a different sysname.
&nbsp;So &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; our<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; choices basically are to do a &quot;port&quot; with a sysname
like &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; i386_xenlinux26<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; (which would be consistent with how we handled UML), or wait
for the<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; cleanups of which you speak, and hope the result will be
the &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; elimination of<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; arch/xen in favor of a config option.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; I think it would be less trouble for everyone in the long run
to wait<br>
&gt; &gt; for the removal of arch/xen. If someone needs to hack up the
openafs<br>
&gt; &gt; build system, maybe put a patch on the openafs web site, or someother<br>
&gt; &gt; place, but it probably shouldn't be put in the mainline cvs.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Agreed.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; It's worth noting that the approach used by Xen requires
an &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; architecture<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; with more than two privilege levels, and while i386 and its
&nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; relatives have<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; that feature, relatively few other architectures do. &nbsp;So,
it may &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; be quite<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; some time before we see a xen for any other architecture.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; I'm not so sure.. Even if the Xen/x86 approach requires multiple<br>
&gt; &gt; priviledges, a virtualization system can work just fine using
with the<br>
&gt; &gt; core virtual machine code running as priviledged, and everything
else<br>
&gt; &gt; running upriviledged, and haveing the VM trap the 'illegal &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt; instruction'<br>
&gt; &gt; handler to emulate priviledged operations. This is what Mac-on-
<br>
&gt; &gt; Linux does.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; http://www.maconlinux.org/<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; UML uses this trick as well<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; &gt; There's even a note on the xen-users list about IBM working on
a &nbsp;<br>
&gt; &gt; Power5<br>
&gt; &gt; port.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2005-05/ <br>
&gt; &gt; msg00433.html<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; The Power5 is a very different matter, because there, IIRC, Xen can
use<br>
&gt; the hypervisor to handle most of the work. &nbsp;I think IBM even
has Power5<br>
&gt; systems that can run 2 or more copies of Linux independently, without<br>
&gt; _any_ virtualization software (although I could be mistaken).<br>
</tt></font>
<br><font size=2><tt>yes, </tt></font>
<br><font size=2><tt>they can run up to 40 independent linuxes on a single
box , it's called LPARing ..</tt></font>
<br><font size=2><tt>i don't know any practical use (except testing) beyond
4 or 6 on a single box, but from the theory it works up to 40 :-)</tt></font>
<br>
<br><font size=2><tt>&gt; <br>
&gt; Cheers,<br>
&gt; Kyle Moffett<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----<br>
&gt; Version: 3.12<br>
&gt; GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a18 C++++&gt;$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)&gt;$ P+++(++++)&gt;$<br>
&gt; L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+<br>
&gt; PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e-&gt;++++$ h!*()&gt;++$
&nbsp;<br>
&gt; r &nbsp;!y?(-)<br>
&gt; ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; OpenAFS-devel mailing list<br>
&gt; OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org<br>
&gt; https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel<br>
</tt></font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Mfg Sven Oehme<br>
<br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Dept. A153, &nbsp;STG EMEA AIS Strategy and Architecture<br>
Development Leader Open Enterprise System Virtualization <br>
IBM intranet ---&gt; http://w3.ais.mainz.de.ibm.com/oesv/<br>
Phone (+49)-6131-84-3151<br>
Fax &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;(+49)-6131-84-6708<br>
Mobil &nbsp; (+49)-171-970-6664<br>
E-Mail : oehmes@de.ibm.com</font>
<br>
--=_alternative 007A6762C125702E_=--