From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA568CA9EAE for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C0CC2084C for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389685AbfJWHK6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:10:58 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:44208 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727574AbfJWHK6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:10:58 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Oct 2019 00:10:57 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,219,1569308400"; d="scan'208";a="372790337" Received: from dpdk-virtio-tbie-2.sh.intel.com (HELO ___) ([10.67.104.74]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Oct 2019 00:10:54 -0700 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 15:07:47 +0800 From: Tiwei Bie To: Jason Wang Cc: mst@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, maxime.coquelin@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, dan.daly@intel.com, cunming.liang@intel.com, zhihong.wang@intel.com, lingshan.zhu@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vhost: introduce mdev based hardware backend Message-ID: <20191023070747.GA30533@___> References: <20191022095230.2514-1-tiwei.bie@intel.com> <47a572fd-5597-1972-e177-8ee25ca51247@redhat.com> <20191023030253.GA15401@___> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 01:46:23PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > On 2019/10/23 上午11:02, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 09:30:16PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2019/10/22 下午5:52, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > This patch introduces a mdev based hardware vhost backend. > > > > This backend is built on top of the same abstraction used > > > > in virtio-mdev and provides a generic vhost interface for > > > > userspace to accelerate the virtio devices in guest. > > > > > > > > This backend is implemented as a mdev device driver on top > > > > of the same mdev device ops used in virtio-mdev but using > > > > a different mdev class id, and it will register the device > > > > as a VFIO device for userspace to use. Userspace can setup > > > > the IOMMU with the existing VFIO container/group APIs and > > > > then get the device fd with the device name. After getting > > > > the device fd of this device, userspace can use vhost ioctls > > > > to setup the backend. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tiwei Bie > > > > --- > > > > This patch depends on below series: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/17/286 > > > > > > > > v1 -> v2: > > > > - Replace _SET_STATE with _SET_STATUS (MST); > > > > - Check status bits at each step (MST); > > > > - Report the max ring size and max number of queues (MST); > > > > - Add missing MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE (Jason); > > > > - Only support the network backend w/o multiqueue for now; > > > > > > Any idea on how to extend it to support devices other than net? I think we > > > want a generic API or an API that could be made generic in the future. > > > > > > Do we want to e.g having a generic vhost mdev for all kinds of devices or > > > introducing e.g vhost-net-mdev and vhost-scsi-mdev? > > One possible way is to do what vhost-user does. I.e. Apart from > > the generic ring, features, ... related ioctls, we also introduce > > device specific ioctls when we need them. As vhost-mdev just needs > > to forward configs between parent and userspace and even won't > > cache any info when possible, > > > So it looks to me this is only possible if we expose e.g set_config and > get_config to userspace. The set_config and get_config interface isn't really everything of device specific settings. We also have ctrlq in virtio-net. > > > > I think it might be better to do > > this in one generic vhost-mdev module. > > > Looking at definitions of VhostUserRequest in qemu, it mixed generic API > with device specific API. If we want go this ways (a generic vhost-mdev), > more questions needs to be answered: > > 1) How could userspace know which type of vhost it would use? Do we need to > expose virtio subsystem device in for userspace this case? > > 2) That generic vhost-mdev module still need to filter out unsupported > ioctls for a specific type. E.g if it probes a net device, it should refuse > API for other type. This in fact a vhost-mdev-net but just not modularize it > on top of vhost-mdev. > > > > > > > > > > > - Some minor fixes and improvements; > > > > - Rebase on top of virtio-mdev series v4; [...] > > > > + > > > > +static long vhost_mdev_get_features(struct vhost_mdev *m, u64 __user *featurep) > > > > +{ > > > > + if (copy_to_user(featurep, &m->features, sizeof(m->features))) > > > > + return -EFAULT; > > > > > > As discussed in previous version do we need to filter out MQ feature here? > > I think it's more straightforward to let the parent drivers to > > filter out the unsupported features. Otherwise it would be tricky > > when we want to add more features in vhost-mdev module, > > > It's as simple as remove the feature from blacklist? It's not really that easy. It may break the old drivers. > > > > i.e. if > > the parent drivers may expose unsupported features and relay on > > vhost-mdev to filter them out, these features will be exposed > > to userspace automatically when they are enabled in vhost-mdev > > in the future. > > > The issue is, it's only that vhost-mdev knows its own limitation. E.g in > this patch, vhost-mdev only implements a subset of transport API, but parent > doesn't know about that. > > Still MQ as an example, there's no way (or no need) for parent to know that > vhost-mdev does not support MQ. The mdev is a MDEV_CLASS_ID_VHOST mdev device. When the parent is being developed, it should know the currently supported features of vhost-mdev. > And this allows old kenrel to work with new > parent drivers. The new drivers should provide things like VIRTIO_MDEV_F_VERSION_1 to be compatible with the old kernels. When VIRTIO_MDEV_F_VERSION_1 is provided/negotiated, the behaviours should be consistent. > > So basically we have three choices here: > > 1) Implement what vhost-user did and implement a generic vhost-mdev (but may > still have lots of device specific code). To support advanced feature which > requires the access to config, still lots of API that needs to be added. > > 2) Implement what vhost-kernel did, have a generic vhost-mdev driver and a > vhost bus on top for match a device specific API e.g vhost-mdev-net. We > still have device specific API but limit them only to device specific > module. Still require new ioctls for advanced feature like MQ. > > 3) Simply expose all virtio-mdev transport to userspace. Currently, virtio-mdev transport is a set of function callbacks defined in kernel. How to simply expose virtio-mdev transport to userspace? > A generic module > without any type specific code (like virtio-mdev). No need dedicated API for > e.g MQ. But then the API will look much different than current vhost did. > > Consider the limitation of 1) I tend to choose 2 or 3. What's you opinion? > >