Sarton O'Brien | 1 Mar 06:19 2008

Re: unable to boot Solaris domU: getdomaininfo failed

Tobias Nygren wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:31:08 +0000
> River Tarnell <river <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>   
>> hello,
>>
>> after following the instructions for configuring a Solaris domU at
>> [0], i am unable to boot the domain:
>>     
>
> Does a NetBSD DomU boot ok?
>   

Good point.

I just tested the image and it seems to run fine on current. I renamed 
'unix' to 'domu-sun', 'boot_archive' to 'domu-sun-ramdisk' and 
'root.file' to 'sun-vnd.img' ...

NetBSD gogeta.internal 4.99.54 NetBSD 4.99.54 (XEN3_DOM0) #1: Mon Feb 25 
16:05:53 EST 2008  
root <at> spike.internal:/usr/obj/sys/arch/i386/compile/XEN3_DOM0 i386

name = "sun"
memory = "256"
kernel = "/domu-sun"
extra = "/platform/i86xen/kernel/unix"
ramdisk = "/domu-sun-ramdisk"
on_shutdown = "destroy"
(Continue reading)

Manuel Bouyer | 1 Mar 19:41 2008

Re: amd64 XEN3_DOM0 missing 'options WSEMUL_VT100'

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:46:38AM -0600, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Well, the Subject: pretty much says it all.  
> Dumb terminals aren't fun.

I added the wscons options.
Thanks !

> 
> It'd be nice if XEN3_DOM0 could 'include' GENERIC,
> but I'm betting there are issues with that.

Yes, it's the same MACHINE_ARCH but not the same MACHINE ...

--

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--

Manuel Bouyer | 2 Mar 18:24 2008

Re: i386 2Gb RAM, netbsd-4-0-RELEASE XEN3_DOM0

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 06:33:14PM +0100, Damian Sobczak wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> again have some small problems. This domU with.
> I want netbsd-4-0-RELEASE as dom0 and NetBSD currnet and Solaris as domU
> 
> My dom1 config:
> 
> Quantum# cat /usr/pkg/etc/xen/dom1
> # -*- mode: python; -*-
> #============================================================================
> # Python defaults setup for 'xm create'.
> # Edit this file to reflect the configuration of your system.
> #============================================================================
> 
> #----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> # Kernel image file. This kernel will be loaded in the new domain.
> kernel = "/netbsd-XEN3_DOMU"
> #kernel = "/netbsd-INSTALL_XEN3_DOMU"
> 
> # Memory allocation (in megabytes) for the new domain.
> memory = 512
> 
> # A handy name for your new domain. This will appear in 'xm list',
> # and you can use this as parameters for xm in place of the domain
> # number. All domains must have different names.
> #
> name = "dom1"
> 
> # Which CPU to start domain on (only relevant for SMP hardware). CPUs
(Continue reading)

Chris Brookes | 3 Mar 22:36 2008
Picon

upgrading from netbsd 4/xen 3.1 on i386 to HEAD on amd64

I'm currently running NetBSD 4/Xen 3.1 on a 1.0Ghz i386 box for DOM0.
I have a few NetBSD 4 DOMU's  and a single Linux (Ubuntu 7.10) DOMU.
I've got an Athlon X2 BE-2350 and a GIGABYTE GA-MA69VM-S2 mobo on the
way which I'm hoping to run the NetBSD HEAD/current amd64 port on for
Dom-0. Will I be able to boot and run my existing PV 32bit DOMU NetBSD
and Linux installations while running under the amd64 DOM0?  If so
what kernels do I use, my existing ones? This will greatly aide my
upgrade path to 64 bits for the DOMUs...

How mature is HVM support with NetBSD and xen? Am I likely to run in
to much trouble getting an XP or MS Server 2003 instance running?

Cheers
CB

Christoph Egger | 4 Mar 09:48 2008
Picon
Picon

Re: upgrading from netbsd 4/xen 3.1 on i386 to HEAD on amd64

On Monday 03 March 2008 22:36:42 Chris Brookes wrote:
> I'm currently running NetBSD 4/Xen 3.1 on a 1.0Ghz i386 box for DOM0.
> I have a few NetBSD 4 DOMU's  and a single Linux (Ubuntu 7.10) DOMU.
> I've got an Athlon X2 BE-2350 and a GIGABYTE GA-MA69VM-S2 mobo on the
> way which I'm hoping to run the NetBSD HEAD/current amd64 port on for
> Dom-0. Will I be able to boot and run my existing PV 32bit DOMU NetBSD
> and Linux installations while running under the amd64 DOM0?  If so
> what kernels do I use, my existing ones? This will greatly aide my
> upgrade path to 64 bits for the DOMUs...

Basically yes. Just exchange your 32bit kernels with 32bit PAE kernels and 
that's it. No changes in the userland are needed.

> How mature is HVM support with NetBSD and xen? Am I likely to run in
> to much trouble getting an XP or MS Server 2003 instance running?

It should work.

Christoph

Manuel Bouyer | 4 Mar 10:16 2008

Re: upgrading from netbsd 4/xen 3.1 on i386 to HEAD on amd64

On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:48:22AM +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > How mature is HVM support with NetBSD and xen? Am I likely to run in
> > to much trouble getting an XP or MS Server 2003 instance running?
> 
> It should work.

It does :). I have several win2003 domUs running here. Performances aren't
great but it works fine.

--

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--

Joel CARNAT | 4 Mar 12:32 2008
Picon

Re: upgrading from netbsd 4/xen 3.1 on i386 to HEAD on amd64

> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:48:22AM +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> > How mature is HVM support with NetBSD and xen? Am I likely to run in
>> > to much trouble getting an XP or MS Server 2003 instance running?
>>
>> It should work.
>
> It does :). I have several win2003 domUs running here. Performances aren't
> great but it works fine.
>

Here a Win2K3 instance is better than WinXP : faster network response time
and global behaviour.

Etienne Labaume | 5 Mar 10:16 2008
Picon

Re: amd64 XEN3_DOM0 missing 'options WSEMUL_VT100'

Selon Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org>:

> > Well, the Subject: pretty much says it all.
> > Dumb terminals aren't fun.
>
> I added the wscons options.
> Thanks !

Could it have been the root cause of the problem below, discussed here a few
weeks ago ?

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.ports.xen/3158

--

-- 
Etienne Labaume

Manuel Bouyer | 5 Mar 10:56 2008

Re: amd64 XEN3_DOM0 missing 'options WSEMUL_VT100'

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 10:16:38AM +0100, Etienne Labaume wrote:
> Selon Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org>:
> 
> > > Well, the Subject: pretty much says it all.
> > > Dumb terminals aren't fun.
> >
> > I added the wscons options.
> > Thanks !
> 
> Could it have been the root cause of the problem below, discussed here a few
> weeks ago ?

Yes, it's possible.

--

-- 
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI.           Manuel.Bouyer <at> lip6.fr
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--

Christoph Egger | 5 Mar 11:19 2008
Picon
Picon

Re: amd64 XEN3_DOM0 missing 'options WSEMUL_VT100'

On Wednesday 05 March 2008 10:56:14 Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 10:16:38AM +0100, Etienne Labaume wrote:
> > Selon Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org>:
> > > > Well, the Subject: pretty much says it all.
> > > > Dumb terminals aren't fun.
> > >
> > > I added the wscons options.
> > > Thanks !
> >
> > Could it have been the root cause of the problem below, discussed here a
> > few weeks ago ?
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.ports.xen/3158
>
> Yes, it's possible.

From the above link, I also see this with a NetBSD/Xen Dom0, when
I boot on serial line only:

getty[380]:/dev/ttyE2: Device not configured getty[394]:/dev/ttyE1: Device not 
configured getty[399]:/dev/ttyE3: Device not configured 


Gmane