Message-ID: <CADGSJ21MxS3+SWCu+JjL09NnsKvv4+D5ZuLhiPtNZiy_Byd+yg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:53:01 -0700
From:   Siwei Liu <loseweigh@...il.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:     Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org,
        "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 03:56:31PM -0800, Siwei Liu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 1:36 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 01:11:56PM -0800, Siwei Liu wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Sridhar Samudrala
>> >> <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com> wrote:
>> >> > This patch enables virtio_net to switch over to a VF datapath when a VF
>> >> > netdev is present with the same MAC address. It allows live migration
>> >> > of a VM with a direct attached VF without the need to setup a bond/team
>> >> > between a VF and virtio net device in the guest.
>> >> >
>> >> > The hypervisor needs to enable only one datapath at any time so that
>> >> > packets don't get looped back to the VM over the other datapath. When a VF
>> >> > is plugged, the virtio datapath link state can be marked as down. The
>> >> > hypervisor needs to unplug the VF device from the guest on the source host
>> >> > and reset the MAC filter of the VF to initiate failover of datapath to
>> >> > virtio before starting the migration. After the migration is completed,
>> >> > the destination hypervisor sets the MAC filter on the VF and plugs it back
>> >> > to the guest to switch over to VF datapath.
>> >> >
>> >> > When BACKUP feature is enabled, an additional netdev(bypass netdev) is
>> >> > created that acts as a master device and tracks the state of the 2 lower
>> >> > netdevs. The original virtio_net netdev is marked as 'backup' netdev and a
>> >> > passthru device with the same MAC is registered as 'active' netdev.
>> >> >
>> >> > This patch is based on the discussion initiated by Jesse on this thread.
>> >> > https://marc.info/?l=linux-virtualization&m=151189725224231&w=2
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
>> >> > Reviewed-by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
>> >> > ---
>> >> >  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 683 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> >> >  1 file changed, 682 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> >> > index bcd13fe906ca..f2860d86c952 100644
>> >> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> >> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> >> > @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@
>> >> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>> >> >  #include <linux/average.h>
>> >> >  #include <linux/filter.h>
>> >> > +#include <linux/netdevice.h>
>> >> > +#include <linux/pci.h>
>> >> >  #include <net/route.h>
>> >> >  #include <net/xdp.h>
>> >> >
>> >> > @@ -206,6 +208,9 @@ struct virtnet_info {
>> >> >         u32 speed;
>> >> >
>> >> >         unsigned long guest_offloads;
>> >> > +
>> >> > +       /* upper netdev created when BACKUP feature enabled */
>> >> > +       struct net_device *bypass_netdev;
>> >> >  };
>> >> >
>> >> >  struct padded_vnet_hdr {
>> >> > @@ -2236,6 +2241,22 @@ static int virtnet_xdp(struct net_device *dev, struct netdev_bpf *xdp)
>> >> >         }
>> >> >  }
>> >> >
>> >> > +static int virtnet_get_phys_port_name(struct net_device *dev, char *buf,
>> >> > +                                     size_t len)
>> >> > +{
>> >> > +       struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
>> >> > +       int ret;
>> >> > +
>> >> > +       if (!virtio_has_feature(vi->vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP))
>> >> > +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> >> > +
>> >> > +       ret = snprintf(buf, len, "_bkup");
>> >> > +       if (ret >= len)
>> >> > +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> >> > +
>> >> > +       return 0;
>> >> > +}
>> >> > +
>> >>
>> >> What if the systemd/udevd is not new enough to enforce the
>> >> n<phys_port_name> naming? Would virtio_bypass get a different name
>> >> than the original virtio_net?
>> >
>> > You mean people using ethX names? Any hardware config change breaks
>> > these, I don't think that can be helped.
>>
>> I don't like the way to rely on .ndo_get_phys_port_name - it's fragile
>> and it does not completely solve the problem it tries to address.
>> Imagine what can end up with if getting an old udevd, or users already
>> have exsiting explicit udev rules around phys_port_name. It does not
>> give you the an ack in saying "yes, I know you're the bypass and
>> you're the backup, please continue and I will give you both correct
>> names", or an unacknowlegment saying "no, I don't know what these
>> extra interfaces are, please go back and leave the VF device alone".
>> We need new udev API for both feature negotiation and naming, or may
>> even completely hide the lower interfaces.
>
> Go ahead and try to make this happen, but I won't hold my
> breath.

Heads-up: I have some working code to hide the lower devices, upon
which the new udev/sysfs interace for feature negotiation and naming
will be built. I will get it posted for review in the next few days
once ready. Hopefully this could end the fight between the 3-netdev
and 2-netdev driver model, as I see most of the problems being argued
in this thread can be addressed by just hiding the lower devices from
the 3-netdev model while keeping its merits still.

Regards,
-Siwei


>
>> >
>> >> Should we detect this earlier and fall
>> >> back to legacy mode without creating the bypass netdev and ensalving
>> >> the VF?
>> >
>> > I don't think we can do this with existing kernel/userspace APIs.
>>
>> That's why I ever said to make udev aware of this new type of combined
>> device instead of doing hacks here and there around.
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Siwei
>
> We can add new interfaces on top but the main purpose here is to
> make old userspace do new tricks.
>
>> >
>> > --
>> > MST

Powered by blists - more mailing lists