Re: add multiple times opening support to a virtserialport

[Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>]

On 07/24/2015 08:00 AM, Matt Ma wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Linaro has developed the foundation for the new Android Emulator code
> base based on a fairly recent upstream QEMU code base, when we
> re-based the code, we updated the device model to be more virtio based
> (for example the drives are now virtio block devices). The aim of this
> is to minimise the delta between upstream and the Android specific
> changes to QEMU. One Android emulator specific feature is the
> AndroidPipe.
> 
> AndroidPipe is a communication channel between the guest system and
> the emulator itself. Guest side device node can be opened by multi
> processes at the same time with different service name. It has a
> de-multiplexer on the QEMU side to figure out which service the guest
> actually wanted, so the first write after opening device node is the
> service name guest wanted, after QEMU backend receive this service
> name, create a corresponding communication channel, initialize related
> component, such as file descriptor which connect to the host socket
> serve. So each opening in guest will create a separated communication
> channel.
> 
> We can create a separate device for each service type, however some
> services, such as the OpenGL emulation, need to have multiple open
> channels at a time. This is currently not possible using the
> virtserialport which can only be opened once.
> 
> Current virtserialport can not  be opened by multiple processes at the
> same time. I know virtserialport has provided buffers beforehand to
> cache data from host to guest, so even there is no guest read, data
> can still be transported from host to guest kernel, when there is
> guest read request, just copy cached data to user space.
> 
> We are not sure clearly whether virtio can support
> multi-open-per-device semantics or not, followings are just our
> initial ideas about adding multi-open-per-device feature to a port:
> 
> * when there is a open request on a port, kernel will allocate a
> portclient with new id and __wait_queue_head to track this request
> * save this portclient in file->private_data
> * guest kernel pass this portclient info to QEMU and notify that the
> port has been opened
> * QEMU backend will create a clientinfo struct to track this
> communication channel, initialize related component
> * we may change the kernel side strategy of allocating receiving
> buffers in advance to a new strategy, that is when there is a read
> request:
>     - allocate a port_buffer, put user space buffer address to
> port_buffer.buf, share memory to avoid memcpy
>     - put both portclient id(or portclient addrss) and port_buffer.buf
> to virtqueue, that is the length of buffers chain is 2
>     - kick to notify QEMU backend to consume read buffer
>     - QEMU backend read portclient info firstly to find the correct
> clientinfo, then read host data directly into virtqueue buffer to
> avoid memcpy
>     - guest kernel will wait(similarly in block mode, because the user
> space address has been put into virtqueue) until QEMU backend has
> consumed buffer(all data/part data/nothing have been sent to host
> side)
>     - if nothing has been read from host and file descriptor is in
> block mode, read request will wait through __wait_queue_head until
> host side is readable
> 
> * above read logic may change the current behavior of transferring
> data to guest kernel even without guest user read
> 
> * when there is a write request:
>     - allocate a port_buffer, put user space buffer address to
> port_buffer.buf, share memory to avoid memcpy
>     - put both portclient id(or portclient addrss) and port_buffer.buf
> to virtqueue, the length of buffers chain is 2
>     - kick to notify QEMU backend to consume write buffer
>     - QEMU backend read portclient info firstly to find the correct
> clientinfo, then write the virtqueue buffer content to host side as
> current logic
>     - guest kernel will wait(similarly in block mode, because the user
> space address has been put into virtqueue) until QEMU backend has
> consumed buffer(all data/part data/nothing have been receive from host
> side)
>     - if nothing has been sent out and file descriptor is in block
> mode, write request will wait through __wait_queue_head until host
> side is writable
> 
> We obviously don't want to regress existing virtio behaviour and
> performance and welcome the communities expertise to point out
> anything we may have missed out before we get to far down implementing
> our initial proof-of-concept.

Would virtio-vsock be interesting for your purposes?

http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/stefanha-kvm-forum-2015.pdf

(Video doesn't seem to be up yet, but should probably be available eventually
at the following link)

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLW3ep1uCIRfyLNSu708gWG7uvqlolk0ep

Regards,
Christopher Covington

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project