Re: [Xen-API] Guest Utilities - HVM vs PV mode

[Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:30:13PM -0600, Alexandre Kouznetsov wrote:
> Hello, George.
> 
> El 15/01/13 01:38, George Shuklin escribió:
> >xe vm-list uuid=... params=HVM-boot-policy, if not empty, HVM mode, if
> >empty - PV mode.
> Well, that seems a good criteria, but there is something still
> unclear to me.
> 
> I have deployed a Debian 6.0 64-bit machine on a XCP 1.6. Judging by
> HVM-boot-policy parameter (empty) and PV-bootloader (pygrub) it's
> running in PV mode. It boots Squeeze's default kernel,
> 2.6.32-5-amd64 (not 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64).
> 
> But, my VM's dmesg output mentions Xen, including this specific reference:
> [    0.000000] Booting paravirtualized kernel on Xen
> [    0.000000] Xen version: 4.1.3 (preserve-AD)
> 
> How so?
> Does Squeeze's linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64 already includes Xen PV
> support? I believed it was included since v3.0.
> I'm quite sure it's the same stock kernel image, I has the same MD5
> hash as a regular Debian 6.0 64-bit installation I have around.
>

Upstream Linux has had Xen domU support since 2.6.24.
So yes, Linux 2.6.32 default kernel has pvops Xen PV support.

Xen dom0 support was added around Linux 3.0 timeframe.

-- Pasi

> (BTW, didn't knew pygrub already worked with Grub2 config file,
> apparently it does!)
> 
> I must say, I'm quite happy with this setup, so there is no need to
> do anything else to convert my VM to PV mode, but I don't understand
> it.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> -- 
> Alexandre Kouznetsov
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-api mailing list
> Xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api

_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api