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

    CH 8.2

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    ch 8.2
    23 Posts 11 Posters 5.4k Views 2 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.
    • olivierlambertO Offline
      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
      last edited by

      Xen is 4.13.1-9.1 and Dom0 kernel is 4.19.0+1. Not surprising for a Citrix LTS πŸ™‚

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M Offline
        mathsq4
        last edited by

        Since Xen Project released brand new 4.14 version just recent, is it too late to include it in 8.2 XCP-ng release?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • olivierlambertO Offline
          olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
          last edited by

          @mathsq4 we don't do that. Including a new Xen version is often requiring a lot of work to be sure the API/ABI doesn't break anything, and probably modify stuff around it.

          We could always try somehow at some point in testing repo, but it's far harder than you might think in the first place πŸ™‚

          C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • A Offline
            adriangabura
            last edited by

            Do you think Ivy Bridge will not work with XCP NG 8.2? 😞 I have a homelab and have little desire to retire my xeon 😞

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • olivierlambertO Offline
              olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
              last edited by

              Again, nothing will be "blocked". It's just you won't have sec updates on those CPU because Intel stopped to ship fixed microcodes. So Citrix (and us) can't tell you are secure with those anymore (because of Intel)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • M Offline
                marekm
                last edited by

                What about future support for old AMD CPUs? I see Opteron 61xx and older support was removed in CH 8.0, are there any known issues with 62xx/63xx/P series that might cause them to become unsupported in the near future?
                I rely on used servers mainly for cost reasons, recently moved from Intel to AMD in the hope they will be less insecure (not perfect either, but what is), current 6338P CPUs from 2014 seem to be good enough for now, until shiny new EPYC become cheaper in a few years...

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • olivierlambertO Offline
                  olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
                  last edited by

                  I have no idea. In general, "Unsupported" means no security patches possible for those old CPUs.

                  Does those CPUs got NPT? (Nested Page Tables)

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M Offline
                    marekm
                    last edited by

                    According to wikipedia: "AMD Opteron CPUs beginning with the Family 0x10 Barcelona line, and Phenom II CPUs, support a second generation hardware virtualization technology called Rapid Virtualization Indexing (formerly known as Nested Page Tables during its development), later adopted by Intel as Extended Page Tables (EPT). " - so that would be since about 2008 or so.

                    Later there have been some critical microcode updates, 63xx series got one in 2016 (unprivileged guest could crash the host), not sure which older CPUs have this update and which don't.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • olivierlambertO Offline
                      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
                      last edited by

                      So there's good chances it will work, but don't expect any serious security provided by AMD microcodes…

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • C Offline
                        cg @olivierlambert
                        last edited by

                        @olivierlambert what people often forget or not think about: You want to have someting mature, tested, stability proven - especially for an LTSR. People who stay on these branches don't do it for bleeding edge stuff. πŸ˜‰

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • olivierlambertO Offline
                          olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
                          last edited by

                          I don't get it, what's the connection with the current discussion?

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