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.
    • 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
                                      • stormiS Offline
                                        stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team
                                        last edited by

                                        @ThierryC01 Is there a /etc/fstab.orig file on your system? If yes, does it contain the missing line about the ISO? And what's the output of rpm -q setup?

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

                                          @stormi Now that you mention that, I did perform an ISO upgrade I should not have performed would I known. Remember a few posts above. 😐 My bad...

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

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

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

                                            So, the main blocker in the way to upgrade the kernel is a kernel module we use for storage access from the VMs. Work is being done to replace it, which will unlock the possibility to move to a newer kernel. Which version exactly will be chosen in due time. Likely a LTS kernel.

                                            Meanwhile, XCP-ng 8.3 remains on 4.19, on which we'll continue to provide security fixes for vulnerabilities that may affect it in the context of dom0.

                                            X R 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                            • First post
                                              Last post