On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:53:54AM +0800, Yong Wang wrote:
>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> > On the QEMU side, there is no support yet for persistent memory and the
>> > NFIT tables from ACPI 6.0. Once
* Paolo Bonzini (pbonz...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>
> On 26/05/2015 23:25, Christopher Covington wrote:
> > On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >> On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >>> In
> >>> particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
>
On 27/05/2015 14:50, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> Not really. virtio is too heavyweight
>
> I'd be curious to read where in your estimation this weight lies. Is it
> one-time initialization or recurring? Is it specific to the PCI transport or
> does MMIO suffer from it as well?
It's heavywe
On 05/27/2015 05:30 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 26/05/2015 23:25, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
In
particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
br
On 27/05/2015 13:54, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 27 May 2015 at 10:30, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> > For example, ARM's "-M virt" uses a pl011 block for the RTC, and also
>> > uses fw_cfg. Another commonly used ISA device is the UART, for which
>> > again -M virt uses a pl031.
> Partly we do that bec
On 27 May 2015 at 10:30, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> For example, ARM's "-M virt" uses a pl011 block for the RTC, and also
> uses fw_cfg. Another commonly used ISA device is the UART, for which
> again -M virt uses a pl031.
Partly we do that because there were a number of reports that trying
to use v
On 27/05/2015 11:36, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>
> On 05/27/2015 12:30 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> On 26/05/2015 23:25, Christopher Covington wrote:
>>> On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In
> particular I don't see why we nee
On 05/27/2015 12:30 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 26/05/2015 23:25, Christopher Covington wrote:
On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
In
particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
bridge in every virt machine
On 26/05/2015 23:25, Christopher Covington wrote:
> On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> In
>>> particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
>>> bridge in every virt machine - root PCI bus only should be
On 05/25/2015 08:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> In
>> particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
>> bridge in every virt machine - root PCI bus only should be possible, as you
>> can provide disks via virtio-blk or vi
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:53:54AM +0800, Yong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On the QEMU side, there is no support yet for persistent memory and the
> > NFIT tables from ACPI 6.0. Once that (and ACPI support) is added, qboot
> > will automatically
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 02:52:51PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/05/2015 01:23, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > I'm curious if you've tried profiling SeaBIOS to see where it is
> > spending unnecessary time?
>
> No, I really wanted to get the absolute minimum time needed to get to
> the kernel. I
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:21:49AM +0300, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
> 2015-05-23 6:55 GMT+03:00 Kevin O'Connor :
> > Out of curiosity, I ran some additional timing tests. With SeaBIOS
> > fully stripped down (via Kconfig), it takes ~20ms to get to the boot
> > phase on my old AMD system. Of that 20m
On 22/05/2015 13:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In
> particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
> bridge in every virt machine - root PCI bus only should be possible, as you
> can provide disks via virtio-blk or virtio-scsi and serial, parallel, mouse,
> floppy via
On 23/05/2015 01:23, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> Hi Paolo,
>
> I'm curious if you've tried profiling SeaBIOS to see where it is
> spending unnecessary time?
No, I really wanted to get the absolute minimum time needed to get to
the kernel. I announced it publicly because I think it's also instructi
2015-05-23 6:55 GMT+03:00 Kevin O'Connor :
> Out of curiosity, I ran some additional timing tests. With SeaBIOS
> fully stripped down (via Kconfig), it takes ~20ms to get to the boot
> phase on my old AMD system. Of that 20ms, ~7ms is to enable shadow
> ram, 2ms is to calibrate the cpu timestamp
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 07:23:27PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
> > Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
> > lightweight vir
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
> Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
> lightweight virtual machines. The experimental Clear Containers setup
> requires only
Hi,
> qboot is available at git://github.com/bonzini/qboot.git.
Firmware repo has packages now.
https://www.kraxel.org/repos/firmware.repo
https://www.kraxel.org/repos/jenkins/qboot/
enjoy,
Gerd
Peter Maydell writes:
> On 22 May 2015 at 12:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Yep, it is hard saying no - but I'd think as long as it was possible to add
>> the extra features using -device, it ought to be practical to keep a "virt"
>> machine types "-nodefaults -nodefconfig" base setup pretty m
On Fr, 2015-05-22 at 12:21 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 22 May 2015 at 12:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > Yep, it is hard saying no - but I'd think as long as it was possible to add
> > the extra features using -device, it ought to be practical to keep a "virt"
> > machine types "-nodefaults
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:21:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 22 May 2015 at 12:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > Yep, it is hard saying no - but I'd think as long as it was possible to add
> > the extra features using -device, it ought to be practical to keep a "virt"
> > machine types "-no
On 22 May 2015 at 12:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Yep, it is hard saying no - but I'd think as long as it was possible to add
> the extra features using -device, it ought to be practical to keep a "virt"
> machine types "-nodefaults -nodefconfig" base setup pretty minimal.
Mmm, but -device onl
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:04:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 22 May 2015 at 12:01, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On the QEMU side of things I wonder if there is scope for taking AArch64's
> > 'virt' machine type concept and duplicating it on all architectures.
>
> Experience suggests that
On 22 May 2015 at 12:01, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On the QEMU side of things I wonder if there is scope for taking AArch64's
> 'virt' machine type concept and duplicating it on all architectures.
Experience suggests that holding the line on "minimal" is really
quite tricky, though -- there's a
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
> Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
> lightweight virtual machines. The experimental Clear Containers setup
> requires only
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:51:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On the QEMU side, there is no support yet for persistent memory and the
> NFIT tables from ACPI 6.0. Once that (and ACPI support) is added, qboot
> will automatically start using it.
>
We are working on adding NFIT support into vir
On 05/21/2015 07:21 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 21/05/2015 17:48, Avi Kivity wrote:
Lovely!
Note you have memcpy.o instead of memcpy.c.
Doh, and it's not used anyway. Check the repository, and let me know if
OSv boots with it (it probably needs ACPI; Linux doesn't boot virtio
without ACPI).
On 2015-05-21 15:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
> Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
> lightweight virtual machines. The experimental Clear Containers setup
> requires only 18-20 MB to launch a
On 21/05/2015 17:48, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Lovely!
>
> Note you have memcpy.o instead of memcpy.c.
Doh, and it's not used anyway. Check the repository, and let me know if
OSv boots with it (it probably needs ACPI; Linux doesn't boot virtio
without ACPI).
Paolo
On 05/21/2015 04:51 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
lightweight virtual machines. The experimental Clear Containers setup
requires only 18-20 MB to launch a vir
Some of you may have heard about the "Clear Containers" initiative from
Intel, which couple KVM with various kernel tricks to create extremely
lightweight virtual machines. The experimental Clear Containers setup
requires only 18-20 MB to launch a virtual machine, and needs about 60
ms to boot.
N
32 matches
Mail list logo
