Re: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 2/2] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
flat view
From: Alexander Duyck <hidden>
Date: 2018-01-29 20:09:16
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:24 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin [off-list ref] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 08:26:53PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
For live migration with advanced usecases that Siwei is suggesting, i think we need a new driver with a new device type that can track the VF specific feature settings even when the VF driver is unloaded.I see no added value of the 3 netdev model, there is no need for a bond device.I agree a full-blown bond isn't what is needed. However, just forking traffic out from virtio to a VF doesn't really solve things either. One of the issues as I see it is the fact that the qdisc model with the merged device gets to be pretty ugly. There is the fact that every packet that goes to the VF has to pass through the qdisc code twice. There is the dual nature of the 2 netdev solution that also introduces the potential for head-of-line blocking since the virtio could put back pressure on the upper qdisc layer which could stall the VF traffic when switching over. I hope we could avoid issues like that by maintaining qdiscs per device queue instead of on an upper device that is half software interface and half not. Ideally the virtio-bond device could operate without a qdisc and without needing any additional locks so there shouldn't be head of line blocking occurring between the two interfaces and overhead could be kept minimal. Also in the case of virtio there is support for in-driver XDP. As Sridhar stated, when using the 2 netdev model "we cannot support XDP in this model and it needs to be disabled". That sounds like a step backwards instead of forwards. I would much rather leave the XDP enabled at the lower dev level, and then if we want we can use the generic XDP at the virtio-bond level to capture traffic on both interfaces at the same time.I agree dropping XDP makes everything very iffy.quoted
In the case of netvsc you have control of both sides of a given link so you can match up the RSS tables, queue configuration and everything is somewhat symmetric since you are running the PF and all the HyperV subchannels. Most of the complexity is pushed down into the host and your subchannel management is synchronized there if I am not mistaken. We don't have this in the case of this virtio-bond setup. Instead a single bit is set indicating "backup" without indicating what that means to topology other than the fact that this virtio interface is the backup for some other interface. We are essentially blind other than having the link status for the VF and virtio and knowing that the virtio is intended to be the backup.Would you be interested in posting at least a proof of concept patch for this approach? It's OK if there are some TODO stubs. It would be much easier to compare code to code rather than a high level description to code.
That is the general idea. I was hoping to go the bonding route last week but I got too snarled up trying to untangle the features we didn't need. I have some code I am working on but don't have an ETA for when it will be done. At this point I am hoping we can build something based on Sridhar's original patch that can addresses the items I brought up and shifts to more of a 3 netdev model. If I am not mistaken we might be able to do it as a separate driver that has a pair of calls that allow for adding/removing a virt-bond that is provided with a MAC address and a device pointer so that we can do the bits necessary to get ourselves swapped with the original virtio device and identify the virtio as the backup channel. Thanks. - Alex