netdev - Re: [RFC] Discuss about an new idea "Vsock over Virtio-net"

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]

Date:   Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:24:38 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@...wei.com>
Cc:     stefanha@...hat.com, stefanha@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Discuss about an new idea "Vsock over Virtio-net"


On 2018/11/15 下午3:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:56:03AM +0800, jiangyiwen wrote:
>> Hi Stefan, Michael, Jason and everyone,
>>
>> Several days ago, I discussed with jason about "Vsock over Virtio-net".
>> This idea has two advantages:
>> First, it can use many great features of virtio-net, like batching,
>> mergeable rx buffer and multiqueue, etc.
>> Second, it can reduce many duplicate codes and make it easy to be
>> maintained.
> I'm not sure I get the motivation. Which features of
> virtio net are relevant to vsock?


Vsock is just a L2 (and above) protocol from the view of the device. So 
I think we should answer the question why we need two different paths 
for networking traffic? Or what is the fundamental reason that makes 
vsock does not go for virtio-net?

I agree they could be different type of devices but codes could be 
shared in both guest and host (or even qemu) for not duplicating 
features(bugs).

Thanks


> The ones that you mention
> all seem to be mostly of use to the networking stack.
>
>