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:   Tue, 6 Nov 2018 10:17:45 +0800
From:   jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@...wei.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, <stefanha@...hat.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] VSOCK: support mergeable rx buffer in vhost-vsock

On 2018/11/5 17:21, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2018/11/5 下午3:43, jiangyiwen wrote:
>> Now vsock only support send/receive small packet, it can't achieve
>> high performance. As previous discussed with Jason Wang, I revisit the
>> idea of vhost-net about mergeable rx buffer and implement the mergeable
>> rx buffer in vhost-vsock, it can allow big packet to be scattered in
>> into different buffers and improve performance obviously.
>>
>> I write a tool to test the vhost-vsock performance, mainly send big
>> packet(64K) included guest->Host and Host->Guest. The result as
>> follows:
>>
>> Before performance:
>>                Single socket            Multiple sockets(Max Bandwidth)
>> Guest->Host   ~400MB/s                 ~480MB/s
>> Host->Guest   ~1450MB/s                ~1600MB/s
>>
>> After performance:
>>                Single socket            Multiple sockets(Max Bandwidth)
>> Guest->Host   ~1700MB/s                ~2900MB/s
>> Host->Guest   ~1700MB/s                ~2900MB/s
>>
>>  From the test results, the performance is improved obviously, and guest
>> memory will not be wasted.
> 
> 
> Hi:
> 
> Thanks for the patches and the numbers are really impressive.
> 
> But instead of duplicating codes between sock and net. I was considering to use virtio-net as a transport of vsock. Then we may have all existed features likes batching, mergeable rx buffers and multiqueue. Want to consider this idea? Thoughts?
> 
> 

Hi Jason,

I am not very familiar with virtio-net, so I am afraid I can't give too
much effective advice. Then I have several problems:

1. If use virtio-net as a transport, guest should see a virtio-net
device instead of virtio-vsock device, right? Is vsock only as a
transport between socket and net_device? User should still use
AF_VSOCK type to create socket, right?

2. I want to know if this idea has already started, and how is
the current progress?

3. And what is stefan's idea?

Thanks,
Yiwen.

>>
>> ---
>>
>> Yiwen Jiang (5):
>>    VSOCK: support fill mergeable rx buffer in guest
>>    VSOCK: support fill data to mergeable rx buffer in host
>>    VSOCK: support receive mergeable rx buffer in guest
>>    VSOCK: modify default rx buf size to improve performance
>>    VSOCK: batch sending rx buffer to increase bandwidth
>>
>>   drivers/vhost/vsock.c                   | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>   include/linux/virtio_vsock.h            |  15 +++-
>>   include/uapi/linux/virtio_vsock.h       |   5 ++
>>   net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c        | 147 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>   net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c |  59 +++++++++++--
>>   5 files changed, 300 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> .
> 


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ