XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    XCP-ng 8.3 betas and RCs feedback 🚀

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    792 Posts 89 Posters 1.3m Views 69 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • BenjiReisB Offline
      BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @gb.123
      last edited by

      Hi @gb-123 thanks for the tests

      Can you be more precise with your Dual stack issue reports?

      • are you encountering issue during the isntall or after when XCP-ng is installed?
        Ipv4 and 6 configuration are independant from one another so it surprises me.
      G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • G Offline
        gb.123 @BenjiReis
        last edited by gb.123

        @BenjiReis

        It was just a preliminary test.

        There seems to be no problem when installing. Its just that when dual stack is chosen, and the router ipv6 dhcp is disabled, xcp-ng gets no network.

        I was expecting that in case IPv6 is not available, IPv4 would get allotted. Rather if both are available, both would get allotted.

        This may be a router issue, I will have to dig deeper into this. That's Why I put it to 'Other Notes' instead of 'Bug' section.

        BenjiReisB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • BenjiReisB Offline
          BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @gb.123
          last edited by

          @gb-123 I see, the behavior should be as you said that IPv4 would be alloted.
          Can you run xe pif-param-list uuid={uuid} on your host to see what's the ip abd ipv6 onfig says?

          Thx

          G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • G Offline
            gb.123 @BenjiReis
            last edited by

            @BenjiReis

            Actually, I have re-installed the server with ipv4 only since it was not getting network and the server was needed. But I'll try and do some tests over the weekend.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • gduperreyG Offline
              gduperrey Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
              last edited by

              New Security Update Candidates (Xen and AMD CPUs) for Zenbleed

              Xen is being updated to mitigate hardware vulnerabilities in AMD CPUs.

              • Upstream (Xen project) advisory: XSA-433
                • Citrix Hypervisor Security Update for CVE-2023-20593

              This issue affects systems running AMD Zen 2 CPUs. Under specific microarchitectural circumstances, it may allow an attacker to potentially access sensitive information.

              As this flaw can be critical for AMD Zen 2 users, we integrated the patch into our 8.3. You can read about this vulnerability on our blog here. This update includes the latest bugfix of this patch from upstream. You can read about it here on the blog.

              Test on XCP-ng 8.3

              From an up to date host:

              yum clean metadata --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
              yum update "xen-*" amd-microcode --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
              reboot
              

              Versions:

              • xen-*: xen-4.13.5-10.42.3.xcpng8.3
              • amd-microcode: amd-microcode-20220930-2.1.xcpng8.3

              What to test

              Normal use and anything else you want to test. The closer to your actual use of XCP-ng, the better.

              Test window before official release of the updates

              None defined, but early feedback is always better than late feedback, which is in turn better than no feedback 🙂

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • stormiS Offline
                stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @gb.123
                last edited by

                @gb-123 said in XCP-ng 8.3 beta 🚀:

                Bugs Found :
                The iso creates the partitions: 1,2,3,5,6 ( Partition No. 4 seems to be missing ), this is when NO SR is created at the time of install.

                Hi. I think this is on purpose, in the installer code coming initially from XenServer, so that partitions with a given number always serve the same purpose.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stormiS Offline
                  stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                  last edited by stormi

                  I'm publishing new updates to the base repository of XCP-ng 8.3:

                  • Security fixes for AMD
                  • Debian 12 VM template
                  • Removal of the old and unused experimental EXT4 SR driver. Don't jump: the main EXT SR driver still uses EXT4. I'm talking of the old experimental driver we added back then when the default EXT driver would use EXT3 only. This experimental driver has been deprecated since XCP-ng 8.1.
                  • smartmontools updated to version 7 which brings JSON output
                  • A fix for live migration support in IPv6-only pools
                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
                  • L Offline
                    lyan
                    last edited by

                    Hi, I saw we are still using 4.13.5-10.42.1 version of Xen in beta, however, I noticed that there was plan to use 4.17.x by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCP-ng. I am wondering what is the roadmap of xen in xcp-ng eventually? Do we have upgrade plan for Xen?

                    olivierlambertO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P Offline
                      POleszkiewicz
                      last edited by

                      Great work,

                      BTW, would it be possible to add nvme-cli to the installer image? It would be nice if we could actually attach NVMeOF at install time and install to NVMeOF volumes 🙂 (While keeping /boot either on USB/SD locally or on iSCSI), this way we could easily provision a cluster of diskless hosts, while keeping system storage redundancy by using MD RAID between two NVMEoF volumes located on different target hosts.

                      (with some manual work to attach NVMeOF before mounting root)

                      olivierlambertO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • olivierlambertO Offline
                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO @lyan
                        last edited by

                        @lyan Yes, for a version 9.0, because a major number change means we can make huge bump in kernel and Xen versions 🙂

                        L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • olivierlambertO Offline
                          olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO @POleszkiewicz
                          last edited by

                          @POleszkiewicz Interesting, might worth doing a PoC with this to see if it works correctly. Can you open an issue on the main XCP Github repo?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • stormiS Offline
                            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                            last edited by

                            To pave the way, you can also modify the installation ISO with https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/tree/master/scripts/iso-remaster: add nvme-cli inside install.img, rebuild the ISO, and see how the installer behaves.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • L Offline
                              lyan @olivierlambert
                              last edited by

                              @olivierlambert nice, out of curiosity, what is the rough timeline for the 9.0 release, 🙂

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • L Offline
                                laurentm
                                last edited by

                                Hello, I have encountered a crash with kernel panic and loop reboot on a working 8.2 install. XCP-NG was on a RAID1 SSD partition and datas on a RAID 10 SSD partition. I found no error on the SSDs (which are Enterprise quality) and had no idea how to get a simple way to have the VMs up and running if I wiped and completely reinstall XCP-NG.

                                So, I did a quick and dirty repair remotely through the DELL R420 IDRAC : upgrading the broken 8.2 with the 8.3 beta ISO and it worked perfectly.
                                Nevertheless, IDRAC is showing 192 Gb ram and XCP-NG 8.3 see only 144 Gb .
                                I suspect a RAM issue unless there is something wrong in the beta release.

                                My concern is: how can I move the VMs to another DELL R820 server which should be running 8.2 (since running a beta on production is a very bad practice) ?
                                Should I have to export in XVA files the VMs or should 8.2 could accept motion move ? or backup and restore with XenOrchestra ?

                                Thanks for your advices.

                                Kind regards,

                                Laurent

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • stormiS Offline
                                  stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                                  last edited by

                                  Live migration from 8.3 to 8.2 is not possible. You can't migrate to a lower release. Warm migration using XenOrchestra is possible.

                                  See this blog post which explains the principle: https://xen-orchestra.com/blog/warm-migration-with-xen-orchestra/

                                  L A 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • L Offline
                                    laurentm @stormi
                                    last edited by

                                    @stormi Thanks for the advice. I was pretty sure of no downgrade ability but I did not think to all of the XOA capabilities.

                                    By the way, is there a release scheduled for the final 8.3 iso ?

                                    stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stormiS Offline
                                      stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @laurentm
                                      last edited by

                                      @laurentm The schedule follows XenServer's schedule, with an extra delay for adaptation work, and there isn't any strongly defined ETA for it yet. We hope it will be before the end of the year.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • A Offline
                                        Andrew Top contributor @stormi
                                        last edited by

                                        @stormi You also can't export XVA 8.3 and import into 8.2.... OVA did work.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • T Offline
                                          Thunder-Cloud
                                          last edited by

                                          Have I understood this correct when I think that:
                                          XCP-NG 8.2 is same "source" as Citrix Hypervisor 8.2?
                                          XCP-NG 8.3 is same "source" as the XenServer 8.0?

                                          stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • stormiS Offline
                                            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Thunder-Cloud
                                            last edited by

                                            @Thunder-Cloud this is not far from accurate, if by "same source" you mean based on. Not everything from Citrix Hypervisor / XenServer is taken identical in XCP-ng, so we don't share 100% of the source code. There are various proprietary components we removed or replaced, and we also have our specific additions.

                                            Also, the name "XenServer 8.0" is not accurate : it's called simply XenServer 8.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post