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:   Fri, 16 Nov 2018 14:35:07 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@...wei.com>, stefanha@...hat.com,
        stefanha@...il.com, mst@...hat.com
Cc:     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 2018/11/16 上午10:32, jiangyiwen wrote:
>>>>>> Note, if we've negotiated the feature, virtio-net driver must not use register_netdev to register it to network core. This can avoid lots of confusion.
>>>>> Hi Jason,
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean we should not register netdev if use vsock, and in order to
>>>>> avoid confusion, then I think whether we should keep vsock and export
>>>>> some virtio-net's functions that can be shared. In this way, first, vsock
>>>>> may keep existing architecture and will not affect virtio-net.
>>>> At least it needs new feature bits which will be a functional duplication of virtio-net (e.g mrg_rxbuf).
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>> Actually I mean only use some shared function to make vsock support these
>>> features, in that way, guest see the device is still vsock device instead of
>>> virtio-net device, in addition, it can have less codes and easier to be
>>> compatible with old vsock version.
>> Yes, I think we're talking about same thing. Both of us want to share codes. What you want is to export and share some common helpers between virtio-net and vsock. What I meant is to e.g probe vsock device and merge vsock specific codes into virtio-net driver. I agree it's not a small project. We can start from e.g patches that try to share the codes. This could also give us inspiration for how to unify them.
>>
>>
> Then we have two ways to implement it.
> 1. For Guest, it is a virtio-net device(VIRTIO_ID_NET),
> use a feature bit(e.g VIRTIO_NET_F_VSOCK) to distinguish
> vsock special device and other virtio-net device. For old
> vsock device, it still use old driver to drive it.
>
> 2. For Guest, it is a virtio-vsock device(VIRTIO_ID_VSOCK),
> use virtio device id to distinguish them, it will integrate
> old driver, but it may be more complicated, because it needs
> to consider the compatibility with old vsock device.


This looks even better, btw what compatibility do you mean here? Looking 
at vsock driver, it does not have vosck specific feature.

Thanks


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ