From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 14 02:31:17 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07185E56 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 02:31:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from o3.shared.sendgrid.net (o3.shared.sendgrid.net [208.117.48.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D54D1743 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 02:31:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sendgrid.info; h=from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpapi; bh=y32s+5TYyaM48SYrrHvP9nc2j0M=; b=MJQKBXk9IcvZ6Yh+D1 n0nIxyn+OjoTgGL/Ri1LpvDq+yKT1xMIj80ONmAcMaA06leZoB3w1fs4RZiWhW+4 ZWrFWORYBgZK1TWmb2p3rf4a/+9CTUaOqkLqTQHD552Io580FMVJPN75hQCg51iI Hd6eFj6vk6lK1rQZx0veq/KI4= Received: by mf37 with SMTP id mf37.30198.52ABC2F34 Sat, 14 Dec 2013 02:31:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.tarsnap.com (unknown [10.60.208.13]) by mi70 (SG) with ESMTP id 142eef1867b.f1f.816df for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 20:31:15 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 76289 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2013 02:31:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clamshell.daemonology.net) (127.0.0.1) by ec2-107-20-205-189.compute-1.amazonaws.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2013 02:31:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 79484 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2013 02:28:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clamshell.daemonology.net) (127.0.0.1) by clamshell.daemonology.net with SMTP; 14 Dec 2013 02:28:14 -0000 Message-ID: <52ABC23E.4020408@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:28:14 -0800 From: Colin Percival User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mason Loring Bliss , freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: XEN vs XENHVM? References: <20131214022355.GX19296@blisses.org> In-Reply-To: <20131214022355.GX19296@blisses.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SG-EID: RUbAm5H8PjswBj/QH+sYVehaJogg3iBnZcyVi1bw/Iy/Fo+h4gAY53/ZKIm5P6V4MOkVQRiF4rht7xBgYMIh+FOfUiJRmKUYmLwoHG8BMcFsM45G3pcoafPFDRITkMcY5yaU9VHeBvEH4tJrv8UElbidQGShxhlQZeksXSvg++U= X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 02:31:17 -0000 On 12/13/13 18:23, Mason Loring Bliss wrote: > I was psyched to see that GENERIC kernels in 10 have HVMXEN support by > default, but then I was left a little confused. > > What's the different between a kernel with options XEN and one with options > HVMXEN? The XEN option is for *paravirtualized* Xen -- aka. the original version, before Intel and AMD added virtualization support into their CPUs. HVM uses "hardware virtualization", but we also use PV drivers where available. > I'd love to be able to run FreeBSD domU systems without having to do > a custom compile whenever there's an update. I've got a 9.1 system running > now, using a copy of the XEN config with a couple tweaks, and I see all the > PV drivers I expect. I'm wondering what's different with XENHVM... Also > useful would be knowing if there are remaining differences between i386 and > amd64 as a domU in FreeBSD 10. You want to switch to using HVM with PV devices. That should be a simple tweak to your Xen configuration, and then you'll be able to use a GENERIC kernel. -- Colin Percival Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid