From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yuval Shaia Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] VirtIO RDMA Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 20:34:20 +0300 Message-ID: <20190411173419.GB6259@lap1> References: <20190411110157.14252-1-yuval.shaia@oracle.com> <20190411190215.2163572e.cohuck@redhat.com> <20190411172402.GA14509@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190411172402.GA14509@mellanox.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel2=m.gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: "mst@redhat.com" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , Cornelia Huck , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 05:24:08PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 07:02:15PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:01:54 +0300 > > Yuval Shaia wrote: > > > > > Data center backends use more and more RDMA or RoCE devices and more and > > > more software runs in virtualized environment. > > > There is a need for a standard to enable RDMA/RoCE on Virtual Machines. > > > > > > Virtio is the optimal solution since is the de-facto para-virtualizaton > > > technology and also because the Virtio specification > > > allows Hardware Vendors to support Virtio protocol natively in order to > > > achieve bare metal performance. > > > > > > This RFC is an effort to addresses challenges in defining the RDMA/RoCE > > > Virtio Specification and a look forward on possible implementation > > > techniques. > > > > > > Open issues/Todo list: > > > List is huge, this is only start point of the project. > > > Anyway, here is one example of item in the list: > > > - Multi VirtQ: Every QP has two rings and every CQ has one. This means that > > > in order to support for example 32K QPs we will need 64K VirtQ. Not sure > > > that this is reasonable so one option is to have one for all and > > > multiplex the traffic on it. This is not good approach as by design it > > > introducing an optional starvation. Another approach would be multi > > > queues and round-robin (for example) between them. > > > > > > Expectations from this posting: > > > In general, any comment is welcome, starting from hey, drop this as it is a > > > very bad idea, to yeah, go ahead, we really want it. > > > Idea here is that since it is not a minor effort i first want to know if > > > there is some sort interest in the community for such device. > > > > My first reaction is: Sounds sensible, but it would be good to have a > > spec for this :) > > I'm unclear why you'd want to have a virtio queue for anything other > that some kind of command channel. > > I'm not sure a QP or CQ benefits from this?? Virtqueue is a standard mechanism to pass data from guest to host. By saying that - it really sounds like QP send and recv rings. So my thought is to use a standard way for rings. As i've learned this is how it is used by other virtio devices ex virtio-net. > > Jason