From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 05:39:37 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84B26FCEEA1 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 05:39:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from admin.sibptus.ru (admin.sibptus.ru [IPv6:2001:19f0:5001:21dc::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27EF27C8AE for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 05:39:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from vas by admin.sibptus.ru with local (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1gE6Sd-000KP2-EM for freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 12:39:35 +0700 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 12:39:35 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: bhyve uefi="csm" Message-ID: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-PGP-Key: http://www.dreamwidth.org/pubkey?user=victor_sudakov X-PGP-Fingerprint: 10E3 1171 1273 E007 C2E9 3532 0DA4 F259 9B5E C634 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 05:39:37 -0000 Dear Colleagues, Has anyone been able to boot *anything* with uefi="csm"? Can you please share at least one success story? -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 08:42:26 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9DE3FE5073 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:42:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from payasitekar7@gmail.com) Received: from n6.nabble.com (n6.nabble.com [162.255.23.37]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652E282B1B for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:42:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from payasitekar7@gmail.com) Received: from n6.nabble.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n6.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07F5A1C29D7 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 01:42:25 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 01:42:25 -0700 (MST) From: payasite To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Message-ID: <1540111345654-0.post@n6.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1539682384497-0.post@n6.nabble.com> References: <1539682384497-0.post@n6.nabble.com> Subject: Re: [Bug 216493] [Hyper-V] Mellanox ConnectX-3 VF driver can't work when FreeBSD runs on Hyper-V 2016 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:02:26 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:42:26 -0000 PHA+DQrahtix2KjbjCDar9uM2LEg2LHYs9iq2YjYsdin2YYgPGh0dHA6Ly9ncmVhc2UtdHJhcC5p cj4gIAoNCtmB2LHZiNi0INin2YbZiNin2Lkg2obYsdio24wg2q/bjNixINmH2KfbjCDZgdin2LbZ hNin2Kgg2Ygg2obYsdio24wg2q/bjNixINmH2KfbjCDYsdiz2KrZiNix2KfZhiDYqNix2KfbjCDY oti02b7Ystiu2KfZhtmHINmH2KfbjArYtdmG2LnYqtuMINis2YfYqiDZhdi02KfZiNix2Ycg2Ygg 2K/YsduM2KfZgdiqINmB2KfbjNmEINqG2LHYqNuMINqv24zYsSDYqNinINi02YXYp9ix2Ycg2LLb jNixINiq2YXYp9izINit2KfYtdmEINmB2LHZhdin24zbjNivLgraqdin2LHYtNmG2KfYs9in2YYg 2YXYpyDYqtmF2KfZhduMINin2LfZhNin2LnYp9iqINio2LHYp9uMINqG2LHYqNuMINqv24zYsSDY oti02b7Ystiu2KfZhtmHICwg2obYsdio24wg2q/bjNixINix2LPYqtmI2LHYp9mGICwK2obYsdio 24zar9uM2LEg2LXZhti52KrbjCAsINqG2LHYqNuMINqv24zYsSDYqNix2Kwg2K7ZhtqpINqp2YbZ htiv2Ycg2Jsg2obYsdio24wg2q/bjNixINmB2KfbjNio2LHar9mE2KfYsyDZiCDYrdmI2LbahtmH INqG2LHYqNuMINqv24zYsQrYsdinINiv2LEg2KfYrtiq24zYp9ixINi02YXYpyDZgtix2KfYsSDY rtmI2KfZh9mG2K8g2K/Yp9ivIC4NCtiz2b7YqtuM2qkg2KrYp9mG2qkgPGh0dHBzOi8vc2VwdGlj LXRhbmstcG9seWV0aHlsZW5lLmlyPiAgCg0KINis2YfYqiDYr9ix24zYp9mB2Kog2YLbjNmF2Kog 2LPZvtiq24zaqSDYqtin2YbaqSDZvtmE24wg2KfYqtuM2YTZhiAsINin2LfZhNin2LnYp9iqINmB 2YbbjCAsINmG2YLYtNmHINin2KzYsdin24zbjCAsINiu2LHbjNivINmICtmB2LHZiNi0INiz2b7Y qtuM2qkg2KrYp9mG2qkg2b7ZhNuMINin2KrbjNmE2YYgINmIINiz2b7YqtuM2qkg2KrYp9mG2qkg 2KjYqtmG24wgINio2Kcg2YXYpyDYr9ixINin2LHYqtio2KfYtyDYqNin2LTbjNivICggU2VwdGlj ClRhbmsgUG9seWV0aHlsZW5lICAgKS4g2KfZhtmI2KfYuSDYs9m+2KrbjNqpINmB2KfYttmE2KfY qCAsINiz2b7YqtuM2qkg2KrYp9mG2qkg2YHYp9i22YTYp9ioICwg2LPZvtiq24zaqSDZgdin2LbZ hNin2KgK2b7ZhNuMINin2KrbjNmE2YYgLCDYs9m+2KrbjNqpINiq2KfZhtqpICwg2YXYrtiy2YYg 2LPZvtiq24zaqSAsINmF2K7YstmGINmB2KfYttmE2KfYqA0K2LfYsdin2K3bjCDYs9in24zYqiDY r9ixINin2LHZiNmF24zZhyA8aHR0cDovL3BheWFzaXRlLmlyPiAgCg0K2KLYqCDYtNuM2LHbjNmG INqp2YYgfCDYrtmI2K8g2b7Ysdiv2KfYsiDYotioIDxodHRwOi8vc2hhaGEuaXIvP3A9MTE4Nj4g IA0K2LXZhtin24zYuSDYtNmH2Kcg2KjYstix2q/Yqtix24zZhiDYqtmI2YTbjNivINqp2YbZhtiv 2Ycg2KjYsdisINiu2YbaqSDaqdmG2YbYr9mHINmH2KfbjCDZgdin24zYqNix2q/ZhNin2LMg2K/Y sSDYp9uM2LHYp9mGICjYqNix2Kwg2K7ZhtqpCtqp2YbZhtiv2Ycg2YXYr9in2LEg2KjYp9iyIHwg 2KjYsdisINiu2YbaqSDaqdmG2YbYr9mHINmF2K/Yp9ixINio2LPYqtmHKQ0K2KjYsdisINiu2Yba qSDaqdmG2YbYr9mHIDxodHRwOi8vc2hhaGEuaXIvP3A9MTA4ND4gIA0KPC9wPgoKCg0KLS0NClNl bnQgZnJvbTogaHR0cDovL2ZyZWVic2QuMTA0NTcyNC54Ni5uYWJibGUuY29tL2ZyZWVic2Qtdmly dHVhbGl6YXRpb24tZjU3MjE1NDcuaHRtbA== From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 11:08:55 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B8CFEB39C for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:08:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BD0F883FC for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:08:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A76D320D93; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 07:08:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 21 Oct 2018 07:08:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=serversave.us; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=mesmtp; bh=NJHYcDT6nEn7hwRxOe/vhTtc5q65UR6yQxuhf8OPf6Y=; b=U9vDGnTL0qKL Md74+T4esOHxuSqhfJdQ89duLeB+qt7jQM3qg0kuLTREVllJCefsmJAwQfAFOm5/ 6Zd0aZKQcRk4akCDTJ+GOvdhC9GMkslr9kICuLvGv7n07oZvrWAFQEb1EEYB/kP6 uYu34xrvtIV1jsL3yVlmHfg36Fe7WFo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=NJHYcDT6nEn7hwRxOe/vhTtc5q65UR6yQxuhf8OPf 6Y=; b=NmVhV6Hew1cOWWL1weIM3lkMewTlbetSeghpZsfhQ9dBvsnbfHo3OI6ow BkE4irJnu6DFQZVsUYNfqJjQFs7o9wfF0ElFVgl8zVKOpkkaiFPbOkqRszcDekrK x+HkBSUsCSwEaFhd+5wnPXzcVUOKC7hjbjJtxw5093jxtmepZwR3MGdAHvWqmZP+ 7qiONPqqiCi6770GjE2iKfl3GQDE4+91OAmm25jli35Bkd0kHi5liKzVj4YSvWHv xefNmM4qmk+M/fbnscvZTPcodFKVfcpZDjCoB4ma5YpSjZrT9b98Z+6gopNtqveQ El82IU25ypxDLrtTH6w93bIM6XQNg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.254.16] (c-67-168-46-108.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.168.46.108]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 33D6B102DD; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 07:08:47 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" From: Jason Barbier X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16A404) In-Reply-To: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 04:08:44 -0700 Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> To: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:08:55 -0000 Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts l= ike libvirt? To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it wo= rks for me. > On Oct 20, 2018, at 10:39 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote: >=20 > Dear Colleagues, >=20 > Has anyone been able to boot *anything* with uefi=3D"csm"? >=20 > Can you please share at least one success story? >=20 > --=20 > Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN > 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freeb= sd.org" From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 13:59:26 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11774FF2A7C for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:59:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from admin.sibptus.ru (admin.sibptus.ru [IPv6:2001:19f0:5001:21dc::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD57E8EA4A for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:59:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from vas by admin.sibptus.ru with local (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1gEEGJ-0001Oe-33; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 20:59:23 +0700 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 20:59:23 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov To: Jason Barbier Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" Message-ID: <20181021135923.GA5212@admin.sibptus.ru> References: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key: http://www.dreamwidth.org/pubkey?user=victor_sudakov X-PGP-Fingerprint: 10E3 1171 1273 E007 C2E9 3532 0DA4 F259 9B5E C634 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 13:59:26 -0000 Jason Barbier wrote: > > Has anyone been able to boot *anything* with uefi="csm"? > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? Sorry, I forgot to mention. I use sysutils/vm-bhyve with sysutils/uefi-edk2-bhyve-csm firmware (uefi-edk2-bhyve-csm-0.1,1) > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. Do you also use vm-bhyve and most importantly, what OS do you boot with CSM firmware? -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 14:54:57 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE04DFF509B for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 14:54:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D05791262 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 14:54:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F776213FC; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:54:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:54:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=serversave.us; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=mesmtp; bh=uTyi+IDIzHUbP8sBEX9/bdhhGm0feqAX/aLuYDrHBQY=; b=JqNLy8qyfD31 hJfIDdXU8Q9+P52SZOje99dnmrKw+eHfoBuTwNvboFFkvefDbLEu1spn/YoV53Pp EyP2QNlVSZFBdJS/S8bNF6setl0hYZke4FidPzB8woJ05R3J22V8bFLS1Pi/SJDa Krgvha7xCm6LZUAF/02nIIoUaOpz0ww= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=uTyi+IDIzHUbP8sBEX9/bdhhGm0feqAX/aLuYDrHB QY=; b=J9ug1gd3189EiqIAnyPe/2PIIiCsQ9K4hP4kq6NRNMkbQ3M3X0N/69Kxd 1ZglR74zRVVcKx7i+4thdMMneQO+eqqDHbmGu3/J/gHE8XxX2DpJaUHQBEJ5mJ6c 9Dc7YsT8i6Gf40sdzth3/5SM07CX7OblGO++aOZg8EXpIFHsh3retWIlvtlNK3/c oPxaoxK6QgH0XervgbEpZeXVARhLICDDkFJoNLgIn+rsHY7v6rK9l8IJpEIj2IIc BEw0SnTmTOluAlupIcna2ypH6sa/cPpdfimyJHTNrv1sL9nXi5qkNn64Wz1mKdLb gX+B1hWHp3QsupGHwdrZyvs1Uu1sQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.254.16] (c-67-168-46-108.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.168.46.108]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C66D3102E4; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" From: Jason Barbier X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16A404) In-Reply-To: <20181021135923.GA5212@admin.sibptus.ru> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 07:54:52 -0700 Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0E608F9E-430A-4A12-A63E-3BAC98427B6F@serversave.us> References: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> <20181021135923.GA5212@admin.sibptus.ru> To: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 14:54:57 -0000 Nope I don't use vm-bhyve I use some scrips I home rolled. The os I was boot= ing with CSM was arch linux. Sent from my a tiny pocket computer. > On Oct 21, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote: >=20 > Jason Barbier wrote: >=20 >>> Has anyone been able to boot *anything* with uefi=3D"csm"? >> Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper script= s like libvirt? >=20 > Sorry, I forgot to mention. I use sysutils/vm-bhyve with > sysutils/uefi-edk2-bhyve-csm firmware (uefi-edk2-bhyve-csm-0.1,1) >=20 >> To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it= works for me. >=20 > Do you also use vm-bhyve and most importantly, what OS do you boot > with CSM firmware? >=20 > --=20 > Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN > 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 15:39:12 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A00FF6E82 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:39:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B551892E22 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:39:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kusuriya@serversave.us) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C28921AAA; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:39:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:39:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=serversave.us; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=mesmtp; bh=o+B3CFkuAfLeC6y4BCZVrTNi8ugZJkert3p1+Qb1WR4=; b=SlXBQW1zX6Xh G+MVOJ9OR2Q8jPOU6k1qS9aEH/Bxb7ooUzKDn5RMpR11xZVzDLeayALJbSUEM/H8 SOJHJ4ayexiGPBIvLRNGkC2W4U34RwBv/hEomaisfKEt3CdkzkHnzt/+kC1uzbLK X9Ha1GxnqCduRbnRboVqLjuMxgKuVkI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=o+B3CFkuAfLeC6y4BCZVrTNi8ugZJkert3p1+Qb1W R4=; b=f053NJAlRM1MKlcw6sQCczLxnP9H3S8QzFCF5QiuxTmY9k1eNWk1aCQ/7 G1WTW7tnEEzP7p9E3ceoAeIb3G54VtiSFaGlNtLKrPV7Rr88mSLsXxzCnitgbOW7 XQ/B/F/JyH7dNmxvDjU9Oo8XMP1Sk53MPFhCWGiPy3BxIcPnxB50YqQmyRzTzo2U 5F9LsBUiD7qvsyjNXtEjf5A5gw7Ie3t8VQFXuKdqc2Ql9eWMlUcs+os8Gkn5+U7d 142V0wHF8MnyTBMccHq4jgCdEvAzWZD9DKcDl5tyby6jijFmP3s/XyveXKWw/qVY kyv2YHxLWXbp4ZAA/fIcW2xAWJMRg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.254.16] (c-67-168-46-108.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.168.46.108]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1BFCB102DD; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 11:39:10 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" From: Jason Barbier X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16A404) In-Reply-To: <20181021153322.GA8576@admin.sibptus.ru> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:39:08 -0700 Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <876625AA-A276-40F0-BF5F-7DBD15C06E18@serversave.us> References: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> <20181021135923.GA5212@admin.sibptus.ru> <0E608F9E-430A-4A12-A63E-3BAC98427B6F@serversave.us> <20181021153322.GA8576@admin.sibptus.ru> To: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:39:12 -0000 testing. the VM itself doesn't exist anymore and only gets spun up if I have= to test CSM. Sent from my a tiny pocket computer. > On Oct 21, 2018, at 8:33 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote: >=20 > Jason Barbier wrote: >> Nope I don't use vm-bhyve I use some scrips I home rolled. The os I was b= ooting with CSM was arch linux. >=20 > Why would you want to boot Arch Linux with CSM? It should be possible > to boot it either with grub2-bhyve or with UEFI. >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN > 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 15:33:25 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4075FF6CAE for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:33:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from admin.sibptus.ru (admin.sibptus.ru [IPv6:2001:19f0:5001:21dc::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AC2692D0B for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:33:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from vas by admin.sibptus.ru with local (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1gEFjG-0002FU-P7; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 22:33:22 +0700 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 22:33:22 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov To: Jason Barbier Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" Message-ID: <20181021153322.GA8576@admin.sibptus.ru> References: <20181021053935.GA78332@admin.sibptus.ru> <20181021135923.GA5212@admin.sibptus.ru> <0E608F9E-430A-4A12-A63E-3BAC98427B6F@serversave.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0E608F9E-430A-4A12-A63E-3BAC98427B6F@serversave.us> X-PGP-Key: http://www.dreamwidth.org/pubkey?user=victor_sudakov X-PGP-Fingerprint: 10E3 1171 1273 E007 C2E9 3532 0DA4 F259 9B5E C634 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:33:25 -0000 Jason Barbier wrote: > Nope I don't use vm-bhyve I use some scrips I home rolled. The os I was booting with CSM was arch linux. Why would you want to boot Arch Linux with CSM? It should be possible to boot it either with grub2-bhyve or with UEFI. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 16:01:54 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29BAFF7CB2 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:01:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 805DD93EE2 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:01:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w9LG1n7T005685; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 09:01:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w9LG1nFh005684; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 09:01:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201810211601.w9LG1nFh005684@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" In-Reply-To: To: Jason Barbier Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 09:01:49 -0700 (PDT) CC: Victor Sudakov , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:01:54 -0000 > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. You should always be able to boot a vm that uses and boots with the non CSM uefi firmware with the CSM version of the firmware, failures may start to show up if your booting something that is either purely legacy, or efi aware but falls back to csm because it didnt like something. The older ED2K uefi that we are using and some of the hatchetry that was used to craft its CSM are in a poor state and could use some love. > > > > On Oct 20, 2018, at 10:39 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > Has anyone been able to boot *anything* with uefi="csm"? > > > > Can you please share at least one success story? > > > > -- > > Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN > > 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 16:27:47 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29D8FF9695 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:27:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from admin.sibptus.ru (admin.sibptus.ru [IPv6:2001:19f0:5001:21dc::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F67F951EF for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:27:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from vas by admin.sibptus.ru with local (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1gEGZq-0002e7-Dx; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 23:27:42 +0700 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 23:27:42 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Jason Barbier , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" Message-ID: <20181021162742.GA10064@admin.sibptus.ru> References: <201810211601.w9LG1nFh005684@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201810211601.w9LG1nFh005684@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> X-PGP-Key: http://www.dreamwidth.org/pubkey?user=victor_sudakov X-PGP-Fingerprint: 10E3 1171 1273 E007 C2E9 3532 0DA4 F259 9B5E C634 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:27:47 -0000 Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? > > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. > > You should always be able to boot a vm that uses > and boots with the non CSM uefi firmware with the > CSM version of the firmware, failures may start > to show up if your booting something that is > either purely legacy, or efi aware but falls > back to csm because it didnt like something. If my goal were to boot FreeDOS in bhyve, would that be ever possible? > > The older ED2K uefi that we are using and > some of the hatchetry that was used to craft > its CSM are in a poor state and could use > some love. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Oct 21 21:00:52 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CC4100890B for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B3777A23 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id D923510088F3; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A7410088F2 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A67477A17 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B40FC4D4 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9LL0oG2091591 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from bugzilla@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9LL0ot7091578 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201810212100.w9LL0ot7091578@kenobi.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: bugzilla set sender to bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: Problem reports for virtualization@FreeBSD.org that need special attention Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:50 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 21:00:52 -0000 To view an individual PR, use: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users, which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. Status | Bug Id | Description ------------+-----------+--------------------------------------------------- In Progress | 230773 | [bhyve] GDT limit needs reset on VMX exit 1 problems total for which you should take action. From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 11:24:18 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556FFFF723F for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E61D2751DA for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id A871EFF723B; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:17 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973D3FF7239 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37DEF751D5 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 832847FEF for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9MBOG8E094352 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:16 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from bugzilla@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9MBOGaZ094351 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:16 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: bugzilla set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 231797] [hyper-v] hn driver drops UDP traffic with EIO error when TXCSUM_IPV6 flag on Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:15 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: commit-hook@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:24:18 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D231797 --- Comment #6 from commit-hook@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: whu Date: Mon Oct 22 11:23:51 UTC 2018 New revision: 339585 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/339585 Log: Do not trop UDP traffic when TXCSUM_IPV6 flag is on PR: 231797 Submitted by: whu Reviewed by: dexuan Obtained from: Kevin Morse MFC after: 3 days Sponsored by: Microsoft Differential Revision:=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D198333&action=3Ddiff Changes: head/sys/dev/hyperv/netvsc/if_hn.c --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 11:26:07 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA08FF7313 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:26:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D45D37527E for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:26:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w9MBQ4AH055783 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 13:26:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C1737F3 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 13:26:04 +0200 (CEST) To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org From: Harry Schmalzbauer Subject: bhyve win-guest benchmark comparing Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: <9e7f4c01-6cd1-4045-1a5b-69c804b3881b@omnilan.de> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 13:26:03 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]); Mon, 22 Oct 2018 13:26:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: ; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:26:07 -0000 Hello, I started using bhyve for some of my local setups about one or two years ago.  I'm utilizing rc.local along with some homebrew start_if.NG scripts to connect tap(4) and ng_bridge(4) with a single vlan(4) uplink child, so I know bhyve well enough to know that it isn't comparable in many ways with ESXi as a "product", and I'm completely fine with the extra jobs I have to do for using bhyve! But I've always felt that there are significant performance penalties, wich hasn't been a big issue for my own guests (tinker and WSUS windows). Since I wanted to evaluate the possibility to replace ESXi instances elsewhere, I decided to run some hopefully meaningful benchmark tests.  Unfortunately, the performance penalty is much too high.  I'd like to share my measurings here. Host-Config:     database-------------------------------------          |                                         |       da0    da1 <- Windows Server 2012R2, SQLExpress2017      /  \      |     | r0 |    |     S    S    S     S    S    S     D    D    D mps0/vmhba0 | |                     ,- bhyve-ssd (ufs 12.0-beta1) |    ahci0/vmhba32 –-: |    |                `- esxi-ssd (6.7) |    | 32GXeonE34x3.6G(hyperthreading enabled) So the guest is booting from it's own physical disk (single SSD via mps). Guest-Config: When the host was running FreeBSD, the relevant bhyve disk setup reads "-s 3,ahci,hd:/dev/da1,hd:/dev/da0" Likewise, when the host was running ESXi, the corresponding disks/vml.... were attached to the ESXi "SATA Controller" (via RDM). So in both cases the built-in generic guest-OS (Win2k12R2) AHCI driver was in use, for both, the OS-system disk and the db/bechmark disk. Both hypervisors assign 2 CPU cores (in one package) and 4GB RAM. The guest operating system of choice is Windows Server 2012R2.  As real-world application I chose MS-SQLServerExpress 2017. Simply because I looked for a "industry" benchmark tool and found a trial version which was easy to setup, bringing test-data along with several workload templates. After OS-setup was done, all (G)UI-actions were done through RDP session in both cases. Test-Runs: Each hypervisor had only the one bench-guest running, no other tasks/guests were running besides system's native standard processes. Since the time between powering up the guest and finishing logon differed notably (~5s vs. ~20s) from one host to the other, I did a quick synthetic IO-Test beforehand. I'm using IOmeter since heise.de published a great test pattern called IOmix – about 18 years ago I guess.  This access pattern has always perfectly reflected the system performance for human computer usage with non-caculation-centric applications, and still is my favourite, despite throughput and latency changed by some orders of manitudes during the last decade (and I had defined something for "fio" which mimics IOmix and shows reasonable relational results; but I'm still prefering IOmeter for homogenous IO benchmarking). The results is about factor 7 :-( ~3800iops&69MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 42%IOmeter+12%irq)                 vs. ~29000iops&530MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 11%IOmeter+19%irq)     [with debug kernel and debug-malloc, numbers are 3000iops&56MB/s,      virtio-blk instead of ahci,hd: results in 5660iops&104MB/s with non-debug kernel      – much better, but even higher CPU load and still factor 4 slower] What I don't understand is, why the IOmeter process differs that much in CPU utilization!?!  It's the same binary on the same OS (guest) with the same OS-driver and the same underlying hardware – "just" the AHCI emulation and the vmm differ... Unfortunately, the picture for virtio-net vs. vmxnet3 is similar sad. Copying a single 5GB file from CIFS share to DB-ssd results in 100% guest-CPU usage, where 40% are irqs and the throughput max out at ~40MB/s. When copying the same file from the same source with the same guest on the same host but host booted ESXi, there's 20% guest-CPU usage while transfering 111MB/s – the uplink GbE limit. These synthetic benchmark very well explain the "feelable" difference when using a guest between the two hypervisors, but fortunately not by that factor most times.  So I continued with the initially aimed database test. Disclaimer: I'm no database expert and it's not about achieving maximum performance from DB workload.  It's just about generating reporducable CPU-bound load together with IO load to illustrate overall performance _differences_. So I combined two "industry standard" benchmarks from "Benchmark Factory" and scaled them (TPC-C by 75 and TCP-H by 3) to generate a database with 10GB size. Interestingly, the difference is by far not as big as expected after the previous results. There's clearly a difference, but the worst case isn't even factor 2. I did two consecutive runs for each hypervisor. Run4 and Run5 were on bhyve, Run6 and Run7 on ESXi. Please see the graph here: http://www.schmalzbauer.de/downloads/sqlbench_bhyve-esxi.png Even more interestingly, disk load "graphs" looked very similar – I don't really have a graph for the bhyve-run. But during the bhyve-run I saw 200-500MB/s transfer bandwidth, which is exactly what I see in the ESXi graph. So the bhyve setup is able to deliver constantly high performance in that case! But there's a variation which I don't understand.  Almost any other application suffers from disk IO constraints on bhyve. Of course, block size ist the most important parameter here, but MSSQL doesn't use big block sizes as far as I know (formerly these were 8k and then, since 2010 I guess, 64k). This result perfectly reflects my observation with my local WSUS, which is also database load and I never found performance to be an issue on that guest. I have another picture comparing pure synthetic benchmarks, showing only smaller "FPU/ALU" differences (memory bandwith measured with Intels mlc were exactly the same) but huge disk IO differences, although I used virtio-blk instead of ahci,hd: for byhve (where HDD selection show's "Red Hat VirtIO"): http://www.schmalzbauer.de/downloads/sbmk_bhyve-esxi.png Question: Are these (emulation(only?) related, I guess) performace issues well known?  I mean, does somebody know what needs to be done in what area, in order to catch up with the other results? So it's just a matter of time/resources? Or are these results surprising and extensive analysis must be done before anybody can tell how to fix the IO limitations? Is the root cause for the problematic low virtio-net throughput probably the same as for the disk IO limits?  Both really hurt in my use case and the host is not idling in relation, but even showing higher load with lower results.  So even if the lower user-experience-performance would be considered as toleratable, the guests/host ratio was only half dense. Thanks, -harry From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 11:37:34 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D89FFF7BB6 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:37:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul.g.webster@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0171C75A72 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:37:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul.g.webster@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id q40-v6so45827484qte.0 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 04:37:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=E2+TiDy6dNdl62Oo/XUhKa+rUnuWm7LjA0Io4rZPRwU=; b=VwvD8C4mfZsSllnnFPepa33hx9PAsiItbAlEQYmk5eP85xyUqituDoDVX3MruYEuaC nk5eBFRw8NNB2+xh5iIL9YWuCuR3clNJzgJ2eRDyA3JxAEHNguE973iU/kDCWkkEV5ub uZZzCJqWafn1/lnXyjWooU20E61zUxRWDJkrv04b1mX45mqwaQ3BVrvqk9sSei9NEAth b9Oys6ynDuymNdb17vegR/zelX6Mv3A//yMzb2r0rEl2hqfr6go6VpRVB0vZBva8jLlK 2dN6jWSvvmDWqW0yk5AQ6wTyigE1qffoZPN8HEQ71mSqWQ8sc+yo4abjurQ3o91JrUCA NUNw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfojUY1jKLg3wIgG0vQK2/25ma2EkuSgU2gS5LegS9JYErI0nnWoQ kdtFSFOk5i9qOLA919nVbRnp5YGUdYaTLL3FzU4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV63L0fDbhc6g/pg/mJ6RYmagfngrMIdFjaG88qgc4cujMj7i3KKOjcBmAH9E/HMQJcqzdDUM4RslBhrpu41334Y= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:47d2:: with SMTP id d18-v6mr422648qtr.283.1540208253435; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 04:37:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181006141906.GA10597@admin.sibptus.ru> <20181010012748.GA2382@admin.sibptus.ru> In-Reply-To: <20181010012748.GA2382@admin.sibptus.ru> From: Paul Webster Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 12:37:22 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [vm-bhyve] Does anyone have a vm template for Linux Mint ? To: Victor Sudakov Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Josias_L=2E_Gon=C3=A7alves?= , "freebsd-virtua." Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:37:34 -0000 House move success should be able to have a crack at this sometime this wee= k On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, 02:28 Victor Sudakov, wrote: > Josias L. Gon=C3=A7alves wrote: > > My ubuntu is something like that: > > > > guest=3D"linux" > > uefi=3D"csm" > > cpu=3D1 > > memory=3D2G > > network0_type=3D"virtio-net" > > network0_switch=3D"public" > > disk0_type=3D"virtio-blk" > > disk0_name=3D"disk0.img" > > > > Dear Josias, > > If you have a success story with uefi=3D"csm", please share more detail > with us. > > Does uefi=3D"csm" fork for anyone? Can you boot MS-DOS in bhyve, for > example? > > -- > Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN > 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 11:52:32 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FEDFF860D for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1AC07651A for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 66DD8FF860C; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:31 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 559C8FF8609 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB02576515 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45880843E for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9MBqUDO051574 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:30 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9MBqUUG051571 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:30 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232018] [PATCH][bhyve] Add IPv6 support to VNC frame buffer server Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:30 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ipv6, patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: bz@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bz@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc keywords assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:52:32 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232018 Bjoern A. Zeeb changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bz@FreeBSD.org Keywords| |ipv6 Assignee|virtualization@FreeBSD.org |bz@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 17:14:11 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD69B1039F54 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:14:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C40D8610E for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:14:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w9MHE8kk011517; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:14:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w9MHE83d011516; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:14:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201810221714.w9MHE83d011516@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" In-Reply-To: <20181021162742.GA10064@admin.sibptus.ru> To: Victor Sudakov Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:14:08 -0700 (PDT) CC: Jason Barbier , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:14:12 -0000 > Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? > > > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. > > > > You should always be able to boot a vm that uses > > and boots with the non CSM uefi firmware with the > > CSM version of the firmware, failures may start > > to show up if your booting something that is > > either purely legacy, or efi aware but falls > > back to csm because it didnt like something. > > If my goal were to boot FreeDOS in bhyve, would that be ever possible? Today no, due to the fact we do not have a ATA/legacy emulation, but rather only ahci disk emultaion, though I would be wrong on that point if FreeDOS has an ahci disk driver. This goal is on my "want" list for bhyve to be able to do. THere is a GSOC ata driver emulation that works some, but I do not think it can accomplish this task at this time. I do not know if the CSM code is up to this task either, but it should be. > > The older ED2K uefi that we are using and > > some of the hatchetry that was used to craft > > its CSM are in a poor state and could use > > some love. > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 17:27:02 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071C1104D934 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:27:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from admin.sibptus.ru (admin.sibptus.ru [IPv6:2001:19f0:5001:21dc::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CE6286EF4 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:27:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vas@mpeks.tomsk.su) Received: from vas by admin.sibptus.ru with local (Exim 4.91 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1gEdyi-00088Q-Mw; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 00:26:56 +0700 Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 00:26:56 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Jason Barbier , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" Message-ID: <20181022172656.GA31184@admin.sibptus.ru> References: <20181021162742.GA10064@admin.sibptus.ru> <201810221714.w9MHE83d011516@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201810221714.w9MHE83d011516@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> X-PGP-Key: http://www.dreamwidth.org/pubkey?user=victor_sudakov X-PGP-Fingerprint: 10E3 1171 1273 E007 C2E9 3532 0DA4 F259 9B5E C634 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Victor Sudakov X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:27:02 -0000 Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> > > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? >> > > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. >> > >> > You should always be able to boot a vm that uses >> > and boots with the non CSM uefi firmware with the >> > CSM version of the firmware, failures may start >> > to show up if your booting something that is >> > either purely legacy, or efi aware but falls >> > back to csm because it didnt like something. >> >> If my goal were to boot FreeDOS in bhyve, would that be ever possible? > >Today no, due to the fact we do not have a ATA/legacy >emulation, but rather only ahci disk emultaion, though >I would be wrong on that point if FreeDOS has an ahci >disk driver. According to http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#What_makes_FreeDOS_better.3F FreeDOS has "UDMA drivers for hard disks and DVD drives", is it not the thing? -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/ From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Mon Oct 22 17:39:04 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60668104DE21 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:39:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CADBB8768E for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:39:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w9MHd1Tv011707; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w9MHd1jv011706; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201810221739.w9MHd1jv011706@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: bhyve uefi="csm" In-Reply-To: <20181022172656.GA31184@admin.sibptus.ru> To: Victor Sudakov Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) CC: Jason Barbier , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:39:04 -0000 > Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > >> Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > >> > > Can you tell us a bit about your set up, like are you using helper scripts like libvirt? > >> > > To answer the question you asked when I run a vm with the CSM firmware it works for me. > >> > > >> > You should always be able to boot a vm that uses > >> > and boots with the non CSM uefi firmware with the > >> > CSM version of the firmware, failures may start > >> > to show up if your booting something that is > >> > either purely legacy, or efi aware but falls > >> > back to csm because it didnt like something. > >> > >> If my goal were to boot FreeDOS in bhyve, would that be ever possible? > > > >Today no, due to the fact we do not have a ATA/legacy > >emulation, but rather only ahci disk emultaion, though > >I would be wrong on that point if FreeDOS has an ahci > >disk driver. > > According to http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#What_makes_FreeDOS_better.3F > FreeDOS has "UDMA drivers for hard disks and DVD drives", is it not the thing? No it is not the thing, UDMA was added to legacy ATA at something like ATA-4, Ahci does not come into until SATA existed, and iirc thats around something like ATA-6. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Thu Oct 25 04:47:01 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D5AAFD8B85 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6196F42B for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 0E1FDFD8B7E; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F142CFD8B7D for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D2CB6F41B for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C57BB118F6 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:46:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9P4kxE3072841 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:46:59 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9P4kxmq072840 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:46:59 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 206630] [Hyper-V]FreeBSD 10.2 on Windows 10 & 2016 server may not boot due to multiple invalid disks issue Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:46:59 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.2-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: elianapandey9@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: emulation@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 04:47:01 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D206630 khushi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |elianapandey9@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from khushi --- When the user get stuck and do not find any solution then he needs to come = here and click on https://rememberpasswordsinmicrosoftedge.net after that get the solution easily. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 07:45:46 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00B7310DA319 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 07:45:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C3376AFBB for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 07:45:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from alamar.ventu (alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w9Q7GwsW053565 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 09:17:05 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18] claimed to be alamar.ventu From: Andrea Venturoli Subject: Network identification problem with Windows 10 on bhyve To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Message-ID: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 09:16:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 07:45:46 -0000 Hello. I've got a FreeBSD 11.2/amd64 + vm-bhyve + Windows 10 pro. I'm building the network bridge statically, i.e., I have the following in /etc/rc.conf: > cloned_interfaces="bridge0 tap0" > ifconfig_bridge0="up addm igb0" I'm using virtio network drivers and I'm also fixing the MAC address; i.e. I have the following in /zroot/vm/win10/win10.conf: > network0_type="virtio-net" > network0_switch="public" > network0_mac="58:9c:fc:00:11:65" > network0_device="tap0" The Windows machine is connected to an AD domain. Every time I reboot the server, Windows will think it is in a new network: connecting to the box via RDP, a message will pop up asking me whether I want the machine to be discoverable on "Network 1". Next time I reboot and connect via RDP, it will ask about "Network 2"; then "Network 3" and so on. This has the unpleasant consequence that some services won't run (or actually will run, but won't be reachable) between a reboot and me manually connecting. Is anyone else seeing this? Know how to solve? bye & Thanks av. From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 08:04:02 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA3010DAC4F for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:04:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3AD66B83B for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:04:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (ezra.dcm1.omnilan.net [78.138.80.135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w9Q83xEt017048; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:03:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAC651B4; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:03:58 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Network identification problem with Windows 10 on bhyve To: Andrea Venturoli , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> From: Harry Schmalzbauer Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: <8cad7f22-946c-915d-c6e4-a55d682e9f29@omnilan.de> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:03:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: ACL 130 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.130]); Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:03:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: 78.138.80.135; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 08:04:02 -0000 Am 26.10.2018 um 09:16 schrieb Andrea Venturoli: > Hello. > > I've got a FreeBSD 11.2/amd64 + vm-bhyve + Windows 10 pro. > I'm building the network bridge statically, i.e., I have the following > in /etc/rc.conf: >> cloned_interfaces="bridge0 tap0" >> ifconfig_bridge0="up addm igb0" > > I'm using virtio network drivers and I'm also fixing the MAC address; > i.e. I have the following in /zroot/vm/win10/win10.conf: >> network0_type="virtio-net" >> network0_switch="public" >> network0_mac="58:9c:fc:00:11:65" >> network0_device="tap0" > > The Windows machine is connected to an AD domain. > > > > Every time I reboot the server, Windows will think it is in a new > network: connecting to the box via RDP, a message will pop up asking > me whether I want the machine to be discoverable on "Network 1". > Next time I reboot and connect via RDP, it will ask about "Network 2"; > then "Network 3" and so on. Have you checked inside the guest that it really uses the defined MAC with the interface? Other than that I don't have an idea.  Gateway MAC is also taken into account by Windows NetworkListManager... Good luck, -harry From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 10:05:36 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7D710DDCC5 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:05:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 553226F6F6 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:05:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from guardian.ventu (host-219-49.248-87.enter.it [87.248.49.219] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w9QA5THG072455 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:05:30 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host host-219-49.248-87.enter.it [87.248.49.219] (may be forged) claimed to be guardian.ventu Subject: Re: Network identification problem with Windows 10 on bhyve To: Harry Schmalzbauer , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> <8cad7f22-946c-915d-c6e4-a55d682e9f29@omnilan.de> From: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: <76ae92a5-4ade-8798-d584-eba2ccf35709@netfence.it> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:05:30 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8cad7f22-946c-915d-c6e4-a55d682e9f29@omnilan.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.83 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:05:36 -0000 On 10/26/18 10:03 AM, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote: > Have you checked inside the guest that it really uses the defined MAC > with the interface? Yes, IPCONFIG /ALL shows the MAC address I specificed in the vmbhyve config file. > Other than that I don't have an idea.  Gateway MAC is also taken into > account by Windows NetworkListManager... I'm trying sysctl net.link.bridge.inherit_mac=1, to see if it makes any difference. I'll also check and see if the tap adapter MAC address changes over reboots. Thanks. bye av. From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 10:19:27 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D39710DE2DF for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07EC26FFEE for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id B218910DE2DB; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:26 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A108E10DE2D9 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 323B06FFD5 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3784CC5B for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9QAJPTQ015831 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:25 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9QAJPut015830 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:25 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232472] Hyper-V Guest FreeBSD-current and Intel X540 SR-IOV pass-thru not working Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:25 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:27 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232472 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org |virtualization@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 10:19:58 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C01F10DE34F for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3843B70060 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id F1B2310DE34C; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E082710DE34B for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 819117005E for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C90FCC5D for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9QAJulO016371 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:56 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9QAJuYU016370 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:56 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232459] 12.0-STABLE buildworld fails in VMWare Fusion guest Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:56 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:19:58 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232459 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org |virtualization@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Fri Oct 26 12:34:34 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBC410E28AB for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:34:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hicks@cgi.cz) Received: from bsd.cgi.cz (bsd.cgi.cz [178.238.45.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3855E7596D for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:34:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hicks@cgi.cz) Received: from hel.cgi.cz (hel [192.168.66.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bsd.cgi.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5460468AA9D for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:34:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.66.11]) by hel.cgi.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1561614A6 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:28:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hel.cgi.cz ([192.168.66.6]) by localhost (antispam1.cgi.cz [192.168.66.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id t6t6dzWalUnR for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:27:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail2.cgi.cz (hermes [172.17.174.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hel.cgi.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9A5D161499 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:28:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.8.136] (unknown [82.100.31.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.cgi.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8841C93E11 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:28:35 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Network identification problem with Windows 10 on bhyve To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> From: Jakub Chromy Message-ID: <761f18bd-9266-e641-28ae-ac4427aaa1db@cgi.cz> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 14:27:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0de2dbf1-bb31-e10b-777b-b93d6ca92683@netfence.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:34:34 -0000 > Is anyone else seeing this? Know how to solve? I observer the same over here... -- regards / s pozdravem Jakub Chromy CGI Systems div. ---------------- CGI CZ s.r.o. sales@cgi.cz 775 144 257 234 697 102 www.cgi.cz From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sat Oct 27 18:03:46 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D5D10CEF21 for ; Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:03:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B3F1752C1 for ; Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:03:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w9RI3hk3043106 for ; Sat, 27 Oct 2018 20:03:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76144636 for ; Sat, 27 Oct 2018 20:03:43 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: bhyve win-guest benchmark comparing From: Harry Schmalzbauer To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <9e7f4c01-6cd1-4045-1a5b-69c804b3881b@omnilan.de> Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 20:03:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9e7f4c01-6cd1-4045-1a5b-69c804b3881b@omnilan.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: ACL 130 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.130]); Sat, 27 Oct 2018 20:03:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: 78.138.80.135; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:03:46 -0000 Am 22.10.2018 um 13:26 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer: … > Test-Runs: > Each hypervisor had only the one bench-guest running, no other > tasks/guests were running besides system's native standard processes. > Since the time between powering up the guest and finishing logon > differed notably (~5s vs. ~20s) from one host to the other, I did a > quick synthetic IO-Test beforehand. > I'm using IOmeter since heise.de published a great test pattern called > IOmix – about 18 years ago I guess.  This access pattern has always > perfectly reflected the system performance for human computer usage > with non-caculation-centric applications, and still is my favourite, > despite throughput and latency changed by some orders of manitudes > during the last decade (and I had defined something for "fio" which > mimics IOmix and shows reasonable relational results; but I'm still > prefering IOmeter for homogenous IO benchmarking). > > The results is about factor 7 :-( > ~3800iops&69MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 42%IOmeter+12%irq) >                 vs. > ~29000iops&530MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 11%IOmeter+19%irq) > > >     [with debug kernel and debug-malloc, numbers are 3000iops&56MB/s, >      virtio-blk instead of ahci,hd: results in 5660iops&104MB/s with > non-debug kernel >      – much better, but even higher CPU load and still factor 4 slower] > > What I don't understand is, why the IOmeter process differs that much > in CPU utilization!?!  It's the same binary on the same OS (guest) > with the same OS-driver and the same underlying hardware – "just" the > AHCI emulation and the vmm differ... > > Unfortunately, the picture for virtio-net vs. vmxnet3 is similar sad. > Copying a single 5GB file from CIFS share to DB-ssd results in 100% > guest-CPU usage, where 40% are irqs and the throughput max out at > ~40MB/s. > When copying the same file from the same source with the same guest on > the same host but host booted ESXi, there's 20% guest-CPU usage while > transfering 111MB/s – the uplink GbE limit. > > These synthetic benchmark very well explain the "feelable" difference > when using a guest between the two hypervisors, but … To add an additional and rather surprinsing result, at least for me: Virtualbox provides 'VBoxManage internalcommands createrawvmdk -filename "testbench_da0.vmdk" -rawdisk /dev/da0' So I could use the exactly same test setup as for ESXi and bhyve. FreeBSD-Virtualbox (running on the same host installation like bhyve) performed quiet well, although it doesn't survive IOmix benchmark run when the "testbench_da0.vmdk" (the "raw" SSD-R0-array) is hooked up to the SATA controller. But connected to the emulated SAS controller(LSI1068), it runs without problems and results in 9600iops@185MB/s with 1%IOmeter+7%irq CPU utilization (yes, 1% vs. 42% for IOmeter load). Still far away from what ESXi provides, but almost double performance of virtio-blk with bhyve, and most important, much less load (host and guest show exactly the same low values as opposed to the very high loads which are shown on host and guest with bhyve:virtio-blk). The HDtune random access benchmark also shows the factor 2, linear over all block sizes. Virtualbox's virtio-net setup gives ~100MB/s with peaks at 111 and ~40% CPU load. Guest uses the same driver like with bhyve:virtio-blk, while backend of virtualbox:virtio-net is vboxnetflt utilizing netgraph and vboxnetadp.ko vs. tap(4). So not only the IO efficiency (lower throughput but also much lower CPU utilization) is remarbably better, but also the network performance.  Even low-bandwidth RDP sessions via GbE-LAN suffer from micro hangs under bhyve and virtio-net.  And 40MB/s transfers cause 100% CPU load on bhyve – both runs had exactly the same WIndows virtio-net driver in use (RedHat 141). Conclusion: Virtualbox vs. ESXi shows a 0.5% efficiency factor, while bhyve vs. ESXi shows 0.25% overall efficiency factor. I tried to provide a test environment with shortest hardware paths possible.  At least the benchmarks were run 100% reproducable with the same binaries. So I'm really interested if … > Are these (emulation(only?) related, I guess) performace issues well > known?  I mean, does somebody know what needs to be done in what area, > in order to catch up with the other results? So it's just a matter of > time/resources? > Or are these results surprising and extensive analysis must be done > before anybody can tell how to fix the IO limitations? > > Is the root cause for the problematic low virtio-net throughput > probably the same as for the disk IO limits?  Both really hurt in my > use case and the host is not idling in relation, but even showing > higher load with lower results.  So even if the lower > user-experience-performance would be considered as toleratable, the > guests/host ratio was only half dense. Thanks, -harry