[Users] Mainstream progress?
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Wed Jun 4 09:32:20 EDT 2008
On 13.03.2008 14:20, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Kir Kolyshkin wrote:
>> Please correct/enlarge me if there's anything missing/incorrect.
>> Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>>> the ongoing merge of OpenVZ-based lightweight virtualization into
>>> mainline Linux seems to be progressing nicely and I have a few questions
>>> about it:
>>> - How usable will net namespaces be in 2.6.25? I'm especially interested
>>> in assigning a real hardware ethernet device to a VE.
>> I guess some network namespace stuff is NOT completed in upcoming 2.6.25
>> (a lot of stuff done, but not finished)
>> For 2.6.26, it will be more-or-less working, with just a few exceptions
>> such as conntracks and IPv6 -- maybe.
Do you have an overview of the current 2.6.26 state?
>>> - Will there be an OpenVZ patch or against 2.6.25?
>> As of now we do not plan to have one. Porting to each mainstream version
>> is too much work to do -- instead we concentrate on
>> (1) merging stuff to mainstream
>> (2) supporting our stable kernels
>> (3) stabilizing 2.6.24 (for now)
> 2.6.26 will be the next kernel we will port on.
Yes, I saw the new tree on git.openvz.org. I hope to use a 2.6.26-based
OpenVZ kernel in the near future when 2.6.26 is officially released.
>>> - Do you expect net namespace/virtualization work to be completely
>>> merged in 2.6.26?
>> As said before, we guess that network namespaces will be more or less
>> useable in 2.6.26.
It would be cool if you can give some pointers on how to use the merged
part of network namespaces (with OpenVZ tools or any other tool).
>>> - Which OpenVZ features will not make it to mainline in the 2.6.26
>> A lot. Network namespaces is just one piece of a pie.
>> To paint in big strokes: resource management and live migration are
>> still on our todo list.
>> Resource management: some stuff is in -mm kernel, need to add much more.
>> Will work on that after finishing with net namespaces.
> Memory management will change with 2.6.26. API will be kept, but
> we'll have a per-ve swapout and (probably) drop privvmpages accounting.
>> Live migration: this is much more far perspective, we haven't even
>> started to discuss that seriously on containers@ list.
That's unfortunate, but I can understand concentrating on a few features
to get them merged completely.
More information about the Users