linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 03/14] af_vsock: support multi-transport datagrams

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]

Message-ID: <7416dd44-4f89-bd97-4925-1aa5a2588e76@salutedevices.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:12:07 +0300
From: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...utedevices.com>
To: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>
CC: <stefanha@...hat.com>, <sgarzare@...hat.com>, <mst@...hat.com>,
	<jasowang@...hat.com>, <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	<kys@...rosoft.com>, <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
	<decui@...rosoft.com>, <bryantan@...are.com>, <vdasa@...are.com>,
	<pv-drivers@...are.com>, <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	<simon.horman@...igine.com>, <oxffffaa@...il.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
	<bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
	<jiang.wang@...edance.com>, <amery.hung@...edance.com>,
	<xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, <kernel@...rdevices.ru>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 03/14] af_vsock: support multi-transport
 datagrams



On 29.07.2024 00:53, Amery Hung wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 1:40 PM Arseniy Krasnov
> <avkrasnov@...utedevices.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Amery
>>
>>>  /* Transport features flags */
>>>  /* Transport provides host->guest communication */
>>> -#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_H2G                0x00000001
>>> +#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_H2G                        0x00000001
>>>  /* Transport provides guest->host communication */
>>> -#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_G2H                0x00000002
>>> -/* Transport provides DGRAM communication */
>>> -#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_DGRAM              0x00000004
>>> +#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_G2H                        0x00000002
>>> +/* Transport provides fallback for DGRAM communication */
>>> +#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_DGRAM_FALLBACK     0x00000004
>>>  /* Transport provides local (loopback) communication */
>>> -#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_LOCAL              0x00000008
>>> +#define VSOCK_TRANSPORT_F_LOCAL                      0x00000008
>>
>> ^^^ This is refactoring ?
>>
> 
> This part contains no functional change.

Ah I see, sorry )

Thanks, Arseniy

> 
> Since virtio dgram uses transport_h2g/g2h instead of transport_dgram
> (renamed totransport_dgam_fallback to in this patch) of VMCI, we
> rename the flags here to describe the transport in a more accurate
> way.
> 
> For a datagram vsock, during socket creation, if VMCI is present,
> transport_dgram will be registered as a fallback.
> 
> During vsock_dgram_sendmsg(), we will always try to resolve the
> transport to transport_h2g/g2h/local first and then fallback on
> transport_dgram.
> 
> Let me know if there is anything that is confusing here.
> 
>>
>>> +             /* During vsock_create(), the transport cannot be decided yet if
>>> +              * using virtio. While for VMCI, it is transport_dgram_fallback.
>>
>>
>> I'm not English speaker, but 'decided' -> 'detected'/'resolved' ?
>>
> 
> Not a native English speaker either, but I think resolve is also
> pretty accurate.
> 
> Thanks,
> Amery
> 
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Arseniy