From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 16 16:59:58 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@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 ESMTPS id 452C1436 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 16:59:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from SMTP02.CITRIX.COM (smtp02.citrix.com [66.165.176.63]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91C4A1029 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 16:59:56 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,668,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="91449465" Received: from accessns.citrite.net (HELO FTLPEX01CL03.citrite.net) ([10.9.154.239]) by FTLPIPO02.CITRIX.COM with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2014 16:59:54 +0000 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (10.80.16.47) by smtprelay.citrix.com (10.13.107.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.4; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:59:54 -0500 Message-ID: <52D81009.6050603@citrix.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:59:53 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sydney Meyer , Subject: Re: Xen PVHVM with FreeBSD10 Guest References: <9DF57091-9957-452D-8A15-C2267F66ABEC@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <9DF57091-9957-452D-8A15-C2267F66ABEC@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 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, 16 Jan 2014 16:59:58 -0000 On 16/01/14 17:41, Sydney Meyer wrote: > Hello everyone, > > does someone know how to check if the paravirtualized I/O drivers from Xen are loaded/working in FreeBSD 10? To my understanding it isn't necessary anymore to compile a custom kernel with PVHVM enabled, right? In /var/log/messages/ I can see the XN* and XBD* devices and the network performance is very good (saturated Gb) compared to qemu-emulated, but the disk performance is not as well, infact, it is even slower than emulated with qemu (0.10.2). I did some test with dd and bonnie++, turned caching on the host off and tried to directly sync to disk, PVonHVM is averagely 15-20 % slower than QEMU at throughput. Both VM's are running on the same host on a Xen 4.1 Hypervisor with QEMU 0.10.2 on a Debian Linux 3.2 Kernel as Dom0. PV drivers will be used automatically if Xen is detected. You should see something like this on dmesg: xn0: at device/vif/0 on xenbusb_front0 xn0: Ethernet address: 00:16:3e:47:d4:52 xenbusb_back0: on xenstore0 xn0: backend features: feature-sg feature-gso-tcp4 xbd0: 20480MB at device/vbd/51712 on xenbusb_front0 xbd0: features: flush, write_barrier xbd0: synchronize cache commands enabled. Are you using a raw file as a disk? Roger.