Re: [External] Re: vsock virtio: questions about supporting DGRAM type
From: Jiang Wang . <hidden>
Date: 2021-02-13 23:53:13
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 7:19 AM Arseny Krasnov [off-list ref] wrote:
On 12.02.2021 12:02, Stefano Garzarella wrote:quoted
Hi Jiang, CCing Arseny who is working on SOCK_SEQPACKET support for virtio-vsock [1]. On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:04:34PM -0800, Jiang Wang . wrote:quoted
Hi guys, I am working on supporting DGRAM type for virtio/vhost vsock. I already did some work and a draft code is here (which passed my tests, but still need some cleanup and only works from host to guest as of now, will add host to guest soon): https://github.com/Jiang1155/linux/commit/4e89736e0bce15496460ff411cb4694b143d1c3d qemu changes are here: https://github.com/Jiang1155/qemu/commit/7ab778801e3e8969ab98e44539943810a2fb03eb Today, I just noticed that the Asias had an old version of virtio which had both dgram and stream support, see this link: https://kvm.vger.kernel.narkive.com/BMvH9eEr/rfc-v2-0-7-introduce-vm-sockets-virtio-transport#post1 But somehow, the dgram part seems never merged to upstream linux (the stream part is merged). If so, does anyone know what is the reason for this? Did we drop dgram support for some specific reason or the code needs some improvement?I wasn't involved yet in virtio-vsock development when Asias posted that patches, so I don't know the exact reason. Maybe could be related on how to handle the credit mechanism for a connection-less sockets and how to manage the packet queue, if for example no one is listening.quoted
My current code differs from Asias' code in some ways. It does not use credit and does not support fragmentation. It basically adds two virtIf you don't use credit, do you have some threshold when you start to drop packets on the RX side?quoted
queues and re-uses the existing functions for tx and rx ( there isThis make sense, some time ago I was thinking about this and also came to the conclusion that 2 new virtqueues were needed to handle DGRAM traffic.Sorry, but what is purpose of two new virt queues?
The two new virt queues will be dedicated for the DGRAM packets. Current queues are used by STREAM (and your SEQPACKET) and the credit mechanism is bound up with current queues. For DGRAM, the packets can be lost and no need to use the credit based mechanism. Allocating two new queues will make this simpler and DGRAM will not interfere with the STREAM or SEQPACKET.
quoted
quoted
somewhat duplicate code for now, but I will try to make common functions to reduce it). If we still want to support dgram in upstream linux, which way do you guys recommend? If necessary, I can try to base on Asias' old code and continue working on it. If there is anything unclear, just let me know. Thanks.A problem I see is how to handle multiple transports to support nested VMs. Since the sockets are not connected, we can't assign them to a single transport. Arseny is working on SOCK_SEQPACKET [1], it's similar to DGRAM, but it is connection oriented, so we can reuse most of the STREAM stuff and also the credit mechanism. Maybe you can reuse some of the Arseny's stuff to handle the fragmentation.Yes, just apply patchset to latest kernel. I've solved problem with fragmentation at transport layer.
Got it. Thanks. I will check it out.
quoted
For the channel type (lossless) I think SEQPACKET makes more sense, but if you have any use-cases for DGRAM and want to support it, you are welcome to send patches and I will be happy to review them. Thanks, Stefano [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210207151451.804498-1-arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com/T/#m81d3ee4ccd54cd301b92c00b3b1bca6e7bc91fc9 (local)Thanks, Arseny
_______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization