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.
    • 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 Online
                                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
                                    • J Offline
                                      john.c
                                      last edited by john.c

                                      @stormi It's currently getting stuck on finishing startup on XCP-ng 8.3 beta 1. I have completed the installation of the 8.3 beta via netinstall media. Configured for dual ipv4 and ipv6 network stack.

                                      However it seems to be taking a really long time to bring up the management network or not bringing it up. Alternatively something else is preventing it from finishing the start up.

                                      If attempt to confirm the ethernet port for the management network, it's currently timing out during the attempt.

                                      management connection issue - xcp-ng 8.3 beta1.jpg

                                      management connection issue - xcp-ng 8.3 beta1 - message displayed.jpg

                                      dell poweredge r620 system inventory.png

                                      Can anyone please help me deduce which part of the finishing start-up is getting stuck?

                                      G L 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • G Offline
                                        gb.123 @john.c
                                        last edited by

                                        @john-c

                                        Can you try installing ipv4 only and alternatively ipv6 only to see if it works ?
                                        (Just wanted to confirm something)

                                        J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • L Offline
                                          laurentm @john.c
                                          last edited by

                                          @john-c Maybe you could add an intel NIC if you have a spare one.
                                          I like DELL servers but not much the Broadcom they provide to save some bucks.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • B Offline
                                            bc-23
                                            last edited by

                                            Hi,

                                            I have a issue starting a PV VM on a fresh installed XCP-ng 8.3 server.
                                            The VM was created from a template I exported from our XCP-ng 8.2 cluster and imported into the new 8.3 server.
                                            The template creates a empty PV VM containing the PV boot information to do a network installation.

                                            The error message I get is:
                                            xenopsd internal error: VM = fb7977de-aa28-273b-7e07-90a8c8639559; domid = 9; Bootloader.Bad_error

                                            In the xensource.log I don't see much more information:

                                            Sep 28 08:20:12 X xapi: [error||26203 |Async.VM.start R:5c82647ea60e|xenops] Re-raising as INTERNAL_ERROR [ xenopsd internal error: VM
                                             = fb7977de-aa28-273b-7e07-90a8c8639559; domid = 9; Bootloader.Bad_error  ]
                                            Sep 28 08:20:12 X xapi: [error||26203 ||backtrace] Async.VM.start R:5c82647ea60e failed with exception Server_error(INTERNAL_ERROR, [ 
                                            xenopsd internal error: VM = fb7977de-aa28-273b-7e07-90a8c8639559; domid = 9; Bootloader.Bad_error  ])
                                            Sep 28 08:20:12 X xapi: [error||26203 ||backtrace] Raised Server_error(INTERNAL_ERROR, [ xenopsd internal error: VM = fb7977de-aa28-27
                                            3b-7e07-90a8c8639559; domid = 9; Bootloader.Bad_error  ])
                                            Sep 28 08:20:12 X xapi: [error||26203 ||backtrace] 1/39 xenopsd-xc Raised at file ocaml/xenopsd/xc/xenops_server_xen.ml, line 2201
                                            Sep 28 08:20:12 X xapi: [error||26203 ||backtrace] 2/39 xenopsd-xc Called from file lib/xapi-stdext-pervasives/pervasiveext.ml, line 2
                                            4
                                            ...
                                            

                                            I skipped the remaining 36 lines from the backtrace, as this only seems to be the ocaml stack trace I it doesn't some to contain any additional relevant information.

                                            When I compare two newly created VMs based on the PV template in the 8.2 and 8.3 environment, the look equal.
                                            The PV elements from vm-param-list on both VMs looks like:

                                            xe vm-param-list uuid=<UUID> | grep PV
                                                                         PV-kernel ( RW): 
                                                                        PV-ramdisk ( RW): 
                                                                           PV-args ( RW): preseed/url=<install specific information>
                                                                    PV-legacy-args ( RW): 
                                                                     PV-bootloader ( RW): eliloader
                                                                PV-bootloader-args ( RW): 
                                                                PV-drivers-version (MRO): <not in database>
                                                PV-drivers-up-to-date ( RO) [DEPRECATED]: <not in database>
                                                               PV-drivers-detected ( RO): <not in database>
                                            

                                            I see a difference on the bios-strings parameter, which is empty in 8.2 but contains the following in 8.3:

                                            bios-strings (MRO): bios-vendor: Xen; bios-version: ; system-manufacturer: Xen; system-product-name: HVM domU; system-version: ; system-serial-number: ; baseboard-manufacturer: ; baseboard-product-name: ; baseboard-version: ; baseboard-serial-number: ; baseboard-asset-tag: ; baseboard-location-in-chassis: ; enclosure-asset-tag: ; hp-rombios: ; oem-1: Xen; oem-2: MS_VM_CERT/SHA1/bdbeb6e0a816d43fa6d3fe8aaef04c2bad9d3e3d
                                            

                                            Do you have a hint what could case this error, or where I could find additional information, as the error message does not contain a lot of information.

                                            Thanks.

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