From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep  9 12:16:57 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A1FB61B
 for <freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>; Mon,  9 Sep 2013 12:16:57 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from roger.pau@citrix.com)
Received: from SMTP.CITRIX.COM (smtp.citrix.com [66.165.176.89])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBA4A2FC0
 for <freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>; Mon,  9 Sep 2013 12:16:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,866,1371081600"; d="scan'208";a="51943619"
Received: from accessns.citrite.net (HELO FTLPEX01CL02.citrite.net)
 ([10.9.154.239])
 by FTLPIPO01.CITRIX.COM with ESMTP; 09 Sep 2013 12:16:48 +0000
Received: from LONPEX01CL01.citrite.net (10.30.203.101) by
 FTLPEX01CL02.citrite.net (10.13.107.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id
 14.2.342.4; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:16:47 -0400
Received: from [172.16.1.30] (10.30.203.1) by LONPEX01CL01.citrite.net
 (10.30.203.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.4; Mon, 9 Sep 2013
 13:16:46 +0100
Message-ID: <522DBC2D.8050701@citrix.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 14:16:45 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: Xen 4.2 PV fails to boot -CURRENT PV domU
References: <455A20DD-3985-45EC-AC51-A3AFD33180F1@netapp.com>
 <522DB6A2.5050205@citrix.com>
 <C28354B7-1453-416A-9984-296BA9C76A0D@netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <C28354B7-1453-416A-9984-296BA9C76A0D@netapp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.30.203.1]
X-DLP: MIA2
Cc: "freebsd-xen@freebsd.org" <freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage
 <freebsd-xen.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-xen>,
 <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-xen>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen>,
 <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:16:57 -0000

On 09/09/13 14:06, Eggert, Lars wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> thanks, let me try your suggestion/patch.
> 
> On Sep 9, 2013, at 13:53, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote:
>> May I ask if there's anything that prevents you from switching to the
>> PVHVM port? I wouldn't recommend using the i386 PV port.
> 
> I was thinking that performance would be better, and resource requirements lower. If that's not the case, I can certainly go the PVHVM route.

Performance will probably be better on most workloads with PVHVM if you
have HAP (Intel's Extended Page Table or AMD's Nested Page Tables). And
also, i386 PV port is limited to only one vcpu, while PVHVM will allow
you to use as many vcpus as you want.

PVHVM certainly has a higher resource requirement because it requires
you to have a Qemu instance for each running VM, but that process is
going to be idle most of the time (Qemu is mainly needed for booting).

Roger.