netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:49:38 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
CC:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>,
	alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for		 vbus_driver
 objects

On 08/19/2009 02:40 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>>>>> So if I whip up a virtio-net backend for vbus with a PCI compliant
>>>>> connector, you are happy?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> This doesn't improve virtio-net in any way.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Any why not?  (Did you notice I said "PCI compliant", i.e. over virtio-pci)
>>>
>>>        
>> Because virtio-net will have gained nothing that it didn't have before.
>>      
> ??
>
> *) ABI is virtio-pci compatible, as you like
>    

That's not a gain, that's staying in the same place.

> *) fast-path is in-kernel, as we all like
>    

That's not a gain as we have vhost-net (sure, in development, but your 
proposed backend isn't even there yet).

> *) model is in vbus so it would work in all environments that vbus supports.
>    

The ABI can be virtio-pci compatible or it can be vbus-comaptible.  How 
can it be both?  The ABIs are different.

Note that if you had submitted a virtio-net backend I'd have asked you 
to strip away all the management / bus layers and we'd have ended up 
with vhost-net.

>>>> virtio already supports this model; see lguest and s390.  Transporting
>>>> virtio over vbus and vbus over something else doesn't gain anything over
>>>> directly transporting virtio over that something else.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> This is not what I am advocating.
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> What are you advocating?  As far as I can tell your virtio-vbus
>> connector plus the vbus-kvm connector is just that.
>>      
> I wouldn't classify it anything like that, no.  Its just virtio over vbus.
>    

We're in a loop.  Doesn't virtio over vbus need a virtio-vbus 
connector?  and doesn't vbus need a connector to talk to the hypervisor?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html