netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/5] VSOCK: support fill data to mergeable rx buffer in host

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <83572636-5027-0ffa-3b1e-1d1d44907f03@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:20:45 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@...wei.com>, stefanha@...hat.com,
        stefanha@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] VSOCK: support fill data to mergeable rx buffer in
 host


On 2018/11/8 上午9:56, jiangyiwen wrote:
> On 2018/11/7 21:32, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2018/11/7 下午3:11, jiangyiwen wrote:
>>> On 2018/11/7 14:18, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2018/11/6 下午2:30, jiangyiwen wrote:
>>>>>> Seems duplicated with the one used by vhost-net.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In packed virtqueue implementation, I plan to move this to vhost.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, this code is full copied from vhost-net, if it can be packed into
>>>>> vhost.c, it would be great.
>>>>>
>>>> If you try to reuse vhost-net, you don't even need to care about this:)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>> Thank your advice, I will consider your idea. But I don't know
>>> what's stefan's suggestion? It seems that he doesn't care much
>>> about this community.:(
>> I think not. He is probably busy these days.
>>
>>
>>> I still hope this community can have some vitality.
>>>
>> Let's wait for few more days for the possible comments from Stefan or Michael. But I do prefer to unify the virtio networking datapath which will be easier to be extended and maintained.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> .
>>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Actually vsock use virtio-net as transport path should be a better idea,
> I will try to consider the new idea.
>
> Thanks,
> Yiwen.
>

Good to know this and thanks!