On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 09:00:31PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> This is Bcc:'d to port-i386 as it also concerns PAE, which may be required
> to get things working correctly. The main thread should remain on port-xen.
>
> So I am in contact with the proprietor of a hosting company that is offering
> Xen-based hosting, and is moving to Xen 3. We had a pretty well working
> NetBSD domU setup for Xen2. But for PAE and other things, this host has to
> move to Xen3.
>
> I got the 20060803 build of the Xen3 kernels, and the host ran into this
> when creating the domain. The host has Linux kernel 2.6.16 compiled
> directly from xensource + distro sources, and has xentools 3.0.2-2
> installed.
>
>~snip~<
>
> I found the following very vague post about a problem just like this when
> the dom0 has PAE enabled but the domU doesn't:
>
> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2006-06/msg00077.html
>
> Is there any PAE support in work for i386 (not just amd64)? Looks like the
> Xen folks aren't going to emulate non-PAE domU environments on a PAE dom0
> anytime soon, so this has become a requirement.
>
See the "x86-32 PAE" thread at http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-i386/2005/07/.
General drift I get of it is that PAE is a ugly hack.
That being said, it appears that it may be doable (if much of the work
hasn't been done already). But perhaps NetBSD/amd64/xen should be the priority.
Or, we just run plain NetBSD/i386 or amd64 like one would Windows on a
Vanderpool or Pacifica-enabled chip.
> (As to the host in question, the proprietor has asked me not to mention its
> name until the NetBSD configuration is actually working and they're ready to
> advertise that fact. Let me just say that this would be a *very* cost
> effective way to get a dedicated-like NetBSD hosting plan, and well worth
> whatever effort is needed to get it working. ;)
Hey, I know of at least two other places that are still running Xen 2,
and advertise NetBSD as a choice.
Jonathan Kollasch
Attachment:
pgp877vC8PSJy.pgp
Description: PGP signature