[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191121094614.GC439743@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 09:46:14 +0000
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...il.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jorgen Hansen <jhansen@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] vsock: use local transport when it is loaded
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:01:20PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> @@ -420,9 +436,10 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk)
> new_transport = transport_dgram;
> break;
> case SOCK_STREAM:
> - if (remote_cid <= VMADDR_CID_HOST ||
> - (transport_g2h &&
> - remote_cid == transport_g2h->get_local_cid()))
> + if (vsock_use_local_transport(remote_cid))
> + new_transport = transport_local;
> + else if (remote_cid == VMADDR_CID_HOST ||
> + remote_cid == VMADDR_CID_HYPERVISOR)
> new_transport = transport_g2h;
> else
> new_transport = transport_h2g;
We used to send VMADDR_CID_RESERVED to the host. Now we send
VMADDR_CID_RESERVED (LOCAL) to the guest when there is no
transport_local loaded?
If this is correct, is there a justification for this change? It seems
safest to retain existing behavior.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists