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

    XCP-ng 8.3 betas and RCs feedback πŸš€

    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.
    • R Offline
      ravenet @Andrew
      last edited by

      @Andrew said in XCP-ng 8.3 beta πŸš€:

      @ravenet I did not have any problems with my Mellanox Connect-4 Lx card during upgrades from 8.2.1 (5.0 driver), to 8.3 (5.4 driver), then update to current 8.3 (5.9 driver), and then update to Xen 4.17.3. My card has the 14.32.1010 firmware. It is not used for the management interface. It is used by VMs and continued to keep the same ethernet name and function for the VMs.

      Thanks for testing

      I finally got around to updating the firmware on this Mellanox connectx-4 LX adapter. Bit of jumping through hoops to install tools, find proper firmware, but went from FW version14.18.1000 to New FW version: 14.32.1010. Had to do an emergency network reset again, but it's back.

      Obviously an incompatibility with the new 5.9 driver with much older mellanox firmware.

      AnonabharA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
      • AnonabharA Offline
        Anonabhar @ravenet
        last edited by

        @ravenet This worries me because I use the Connectx-3 cards in my setup. I wonder if I am going to run into the same problem or is it only a Connectx-4 problem.

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

          @Anonabhar I don't think so as the ConnectX-3 is supported only in the older 4.9 drivers and not the newer versions (5.0 or 5.9 or newer). As all of these cards are old and EOL, it would be good to have the latest/last firmware installed anyway.

          stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • X Offline
            xerxist
            last edited by

            Any reason why xcp-ng is focussing on back porting kernel drivers and fixes to an old kernel instead of using a newer kernel and porting back in what is needed for xcp-ng?

            stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • C Offline
              cunrun @john.c
              last edited by

              @john-c Yeah, tried all of that. I get the same issue with older GPU's when vGPU'ing them. So I'm wondering if it's a setting on the Dell Server BIOS.

              J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stormiS Offline
                stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @xerxist
                last edited by

                @xerxist Who says we're not doing both?

                X 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stormiS Offline
                  stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @Andrew
                  last edited by

                  @Andrew @Anonabhar Indeed, it's not the same driver so the old card will keep using the old driver.

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

                    @cunrun said in XCP-ng 8.3 beta πŸš€:

                    @john-c Yeah, tried all of that. I get the same issue with older GPU's when vGPU'ing them. So I'm wondering if it's a setting on the Dell Server BIOS.

                    Have you enabled SR-IOV in Integrated Devices on the Dell Server's BIOS?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • X Offline
                      xerxist @stormi
                      last edited by xerxist

                      @stormi

                      πŸ‘ŒπŸΌπŸ˜ƒπŸš€

                      It seems it would fix my iGPU passthrough issue with the NUC13 πŸ™‚

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • X Offline
                        xerxist @stormi
                        last edited by

                        @stormi

                        Which kernel are you looking at since 4.19 will be EOL in 9 months?

                        stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T Offline
                          ThierryC01
                          last edited by

                          I applied the very last batch of XCP-ng 8.3 updates and after a smart reboot (which took forever to complete and did not resume all my VM automatically), I have lost my ISO storage: the folder "/ISO" has been deleted by the update and the fstab has been overwritten. This is becoming annoying, I never ever had to "repair" anything related to my storage in my 20 years of using Vmware Esx but this is already the second time I have to do it in my 2 years of using XCP-ng and the very first time an update deletes a mounting point. I understand 8.3 is still a beta, hence my feedback.

                          Tristis OrisT stormiS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Tristis OrisT Offline
                            Tristis Oris Top contributor @ThierryC01
                            last edited by

                            @ThierryC01 Why are you using fstab?

                            T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • T Offline
                              ThierryC01 @Tristis Oris
                              last edited by ThierryC01

                              @Tristis-Oris Well, this is how local disks are mounted right?

                              Tristis OrisT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • Tristis OrisT Offline
                                Tristis Oris Top contributor @ThierryC01
                                last edited by

                                @ThierryC01 possible way, but not only one. It recomended to configure nothing at dom0.

                                literally created 2nd local storage with 1 click:

                                1e100978-4e3b-49ba-a3fa-1b98efafa53e-image.png

                                d165a412-7dc5-47a4-980f-bf211b4987b9-image.png

                                4d8a59ab-4074-4840-961f-41ccab62e8dc-image.png

                                T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • T Offline
                                  ThierryC01 @Tristis Oris
                                  last edited by

                                  @Tristis-Oris Except that your method is to create the SR, mine already exists, is full of .iso files and could be wiped doing your method!!! The SR exists, I can see the list of files that should be there but it is marked as "disconnected".

                                  Tristis OrisT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • Tristis OrisT Offline
                                    Tristis Oris Top contributor @ThierryC01
                                    last edited by

                                    @ThierryC01 iso sr can be mounted same way without wipe. I admit some cases where fstab is required, but not for this.

                                    T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • T Offline
                                      ThierryC01 @Tristis Oris
                                      last edited by

                                      Capture d’écran 2024-03-11 aΜ€ 15.54.57.png

                                      Yeah... point is, the mounting point has been deleted and the fstab overwritten during the updates... as I mentioned in my post above.

                                      Tristis OrisT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Tristis OrisT Offline
                                        Tristis Oris Top contributor @ThierryC01
                                        last edited by

                                        @ThierryC01 well, such unpredictable thing shouldn't happens.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stormiS Offline
                                          stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @ThierryC01
                                          last edited by stormi

                                          @ThierryC01 I don't see how an update could delete a /ISO folder on the system. An upgrade using the ISO, yes, because it actually reinstalls XCP-ng and migrates the configuration it knows about, but not a simple yum update. What happened exactly? How did you update?

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

                                            An update will not overwrite /etc/fstab either, or there's a serious packaging bug somewhere. I will do some tests.

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