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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20090820172555.GF6749@il.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:25:55 +0300
From:	Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Patrick Mullaney <pmullaney@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for
	vbus_driver objects

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:37:16PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:

> On 08/19/2009 09:26 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:

>>>> This is for things like the setup of queue-pairs, and the
>>>> transport of door-bells, and ib-verbs.  I am not on the team
>>>> doing that work, so I am not an expert in this area.  What I do
>>>> know is having a flexible and low-latency signal-path was deemed
>>>> a key requirement.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> That's not a full bypass, then.  AFAIK kernel bypass has userspace
>>> talking directly to the device.
>>>      
>> Like I said, I am not an expert on the details here.  I only work
>> on the vbus plumbing.  FWIW, the work is derivative from the
>> "Xen-IB" project
>>
>> http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2006sc/xen-ib-presentation.pdf
>>
>> There were issues with getting Xen-IB to map well into the Xen
>> model.  Vbus was specifically designed to address some of those
>> short-comings.
>
> Well I'm not an Infiniband expert.  But from what I understand VMM
> bypass means avoiding the call to the VMM entirely by exposing
> hardware registers directly to the guest.

The original IB VMM bypass work predates SR-IOV (i.e., does not assume
that the adapter has multiple hardware register windows for multiple
devices). The way it worked was to split all device operations into
`privileged' and `non-privileged'. Privileged operations such as
mapping and pinning memory went through the hypervisor. Non-privileged
operations such reading or writing previously mapped memory went
directly to the adpater. Now-days with SR-IOV devices, VMM bypass
usually means bypassing the hypervisor completely.

Cheers,
Muli
-- 
Muli Ben-Yehuda | muli@...ibm.com | +972-4-8281080
Manager, Virtualization and Systems Architecture
Master Inventor, IBM Haifa Research Laboratory
--
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