BLAG
http://forums.blagblagblag.org/

Virtualisation - exploting the VT chip
http://forums.blagblagblag.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4410
Page 1 of 2

Author:  john maclean [ Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:33 am ]
Post subject:  Virtualisation - exploting the VT chip

I finally have access to a VT chip. This means that I can exploit, (i.e. use), many virtulisation technologies out there. Got a few choices;
- Xen in paravitualised mode. Sounds complicated
- KVM + Qemu. I've used Qemu before and it does work but seemed much slower than native to me.

Now I remember having a convo with Jebba about this. !ping ;-) He said go for KVm as it is built into the kernel. Hey I may even run doze within Linux.

Author:  stevo32 [ Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:38 am ]
Post subject: 

I've used kvm quite a bit. Very nice. Both windows and linux run quite well in it. Oh, and it's really fast too.

Thanks,
Stephen Clement

Author:  extraspecialbitter [ Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:13 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm glad to hear that people have been able to run a virtual solution under BLAG. I've used virtualbox on Ubuntu and have tried vmware on BLAG, but would definitely prefer a non-proprietary solution like KVM. Question: are there kernel tweaks provided to get KVM working under BLAG, or could I use a generic kernel (e.g. 2.6.22.5-76.fc7)?

Author:  john maclean [ Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

I've been using Xen on single processor laptops with BLAG and Debian for over a year now. If you need any help gimme a shout and I'll walk you through the process.

As for kvm
Code:
/sbin/modprobe -l *kvm*
/lib/modules/2.6.21-2-686/kernel/drivers/kvm/kvm-amd.ko
/lib/modules/2.6.21-2-686/kernel/drivers/kvm/kvm.ko
/lib/modules/2.6.21-2-686/kernel/drivers/kvm/kvm-intel.ko


See anything like the above and you are good to go but your BIOS needs to support this. Check this out:-
Code:
 cat /proc/cpuinfo |grep "^pr\|^mo"
processor       : 0
model           : 14
model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM) Duo CPU      L2400  @ 1.66GHz
processor       : 1
model           : 14
model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM) Duo CPU      L2400  @ 1.66GHz

Author:  stevo32 [ Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:27 pm ]
Post subject: 

extraspecialbitter, you can use a precompiled kernel, however, I would suggest that you compile kvm from source if you choose to use it.

Thanks,
Stephen Clement

Author:  extraspecialbitter [ Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:37 pm ]
Post subject: 

stevo32 wrote:
extraspecialbitter, you can use a precompiled kernel, however, I would suggest that you compile kvm from source if you choose to use it.

Stevo - will KVM do well on a BLAG desktop without the VT chip? If so, I'm certainly not adverse to compiling it from source.

Author:  stevo32 [ Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:27 pm ]
Post subject: 

KVM requires VT support on your processor, unfortunately. I'd suggest you stick to virtualbox (which is mostly GPL'd, btw) if you don't have a processor that supports the Intel VT/AMD Pacifica instructions. You could try qemu (which kvm is based off of) too, but it's probably slower than virtualbox.

Thanks,
Stephen Clement

Author:  jebba [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:55 am ]
Post subject: 

If you have a recent CPU that supports VT, kvm is definitely the way to go. I haven't checked the latest fc7 kernels but if kvm isn't there, it should be there "real soon now". What i've been doing is just grabbing the latest kvm, `make ; make installing` it which works just fine. kvm totally rocks.

Author:  extraspecialbitter [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

jebba wrote:
If you have a recent CPU that supports VT, kvm is definitely the way to go. I haven't checked the latest fc7 kernels but if kvm isn't there, it should be there "real soon now". What i've been doing is just grabbing the latest kvm, `make ; make installing` it which works just fine. kvm totally rocks.

Sadly, I'm pretty sure that neither my laptop nor desktop will support VT. The former is a Dell Inspiron B130 with an Intel Celeron M chip, and the latter an IBM ThinkCentre with an Intel Pentium 4. Maybe this is a sign that I need to purchase new hardware? :^)

Author:  john maclean [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:31 pm ]
Post subject: 

Not to worry extraspecialbitter. You can use Xen, virtualbox, vserver and qemu with what you have right now. I can help you with Xen and vserver.

Author:  extraspecialbitter [ Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:48 pm ]
Post subject: 

john maclean wrote:
Not to worry extraspecialbitter. You can use Xen, virtualbox, vserver and qemu with what you have right now. I can help you with Xen and vserver.

thanks for the note. do you know of a good starting point for Xen? I presume it all begins with booting a Xen kernel...

Author:  john maclean [ Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

Read this a couple of times before you do anything:-
https://wiki.blagblagblag.org/Xen. May be slightly out of date but the overall picture is still the same. Then get another picture from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xen. This has some good references, particularly the comparison chart. Remember that you don't have to use Xen as there's always something else that you like or works better for you.

Finally I had a bit of trouble building guest images and came to this method by trial and error:- https://wiki.blagblagblag.org/Xen_images. But that's only if and when you want to use xen and create your own images.


Edited to add:- If you know that you want to go with Xen please use the hcl. Check that your hardware's OK. http://hcl.xensource.com/?showall=no&subtab=systems. Saves you a bit of time, you know.

Author:  extraspecialbitter [ Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm back to searching for a Virtualization (Virtualisation?) solution. I've got VirtualBox running on both 70K and 79K, but a Windoze VM on the former won't recognize Win32 executables, meaning that binaries like "setup.exe" don't work. I've been searching the VM forums about this, but so far I'm clueless.

Which leads me back to Qemu, KVM and Xen. I noticed the BLAG Xen wiki seems to have gone away, or at least the link within this topic. I seem to recall that this was probably my best option if KVM were ruled out.

Speaking of which, could someone refresh my memory as to which flag to look for in /proc/cpuinfo to determine whether or not the VT chip was there? Here's what I've got:

Code:
pablo@brixton=> grep ^flags /proc/cpuinfo | uniq
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe constant_tsc pebs bts sync_rdtsc pni monitor ds_cpl cid xtpr

Author:  john maclean [ Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

https://wiki.blagblagblag.org/Xen_images

Author:  john maclean [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:31 am ]
Post subject: 

If you don't have the vt/pacifica chip then you could give openvz a try. Much lower learning curve and it's a lot more flexible than Xen.

Code:
grep vmx /proc/cpuinfo  | uniq                                                                     
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse\
2 ss ht tm pbe constant_tsc arch_perfmon bts pni monitor vmx est tm2 xtpr

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/