On 2018/11/30 下午8:55, Jason Wang wrote:

On 2018/11/30 下午8:52, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

   If you want to compare it with
something that would be TCP or QUIC.  The fundamental difference 
between
virtio-vsock and e.g. TCP is that TCP operates in a packet loss 
environment.
So they are using timers for reliability, and receiver is always 
free to
discard any unacked data.

Virtio-net knows nothing above L2, so they are totally transparent 
to device
itself. I still don't get why not using virtio-net instead.


Thanks

Is your question why is virtio-vsock used instead of TCP on top of IP
on top of virtio-net?

No, my question is why not do vsock through virtio-net.

Thanks

Just to clarify, it's not about vosck over ethernet, and it's not about 
inventing new features or APIs. It's probably something like:

- Let virtio-net driver probe vsock device and do vosck specific things 
if needed to share as much codes.

- A new kind of sockfd (which is vsock based) for vhost-net for it to do 
vsock specific things (hopefully it can be transparent).

The change should be totally transparent to userspace applications.

Thanks