From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/3] Enable virtio_net to act as a backup for a passthru device Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 17:45:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20180228174449-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1518804682-16881-1-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> <20180220104224.GA2031@nanopsycho> <20180227084959.GB2005@nanopsycho> <20180227134149.2bff667e@cakuba.netronome.com> <20180228070839.GA19654@nanopsycho> <20180228160647-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180228151131.GF19654@nanopsycho> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jakub Kicinski , Alexander Duyck , Sridhar Samudrala , Stephen Hemminger , David Miller , Netdev , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, "Brandeburg, Jesse" , "Duyck, Alexander H" , Jason Wang , Siwei Liu To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180228151131.GF19654@nanopsycho> List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:11:31PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 03:32:44PM CET, mst@redhat.com wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 08:08:39AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:41:49PM CET, kubakici@wp.pl wrote: > >> >On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 13:16:21 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > >> >> Basically we need some sort of PCI or PCIe topology mapping for the > >> >> devices that can be translated into something we can communicate over > >> >> the communication channel. > >> > > >> >Hm. This is probably a completely stupid idea, but if we need to > >> >start marshalling configuration requests/hints maybe the entire problem > >> >could be solved by opening a netlink socket from hypervisor? Even make > >> >teamd run on the hypervisor side... > >> > >> Interesting. That would be more trickier then just to fwd 1 genetlink > >> socket to the hypervisor. > >> > >> Also, I think that the solution should handle multiple guest oses. What > >> I'm thinking about is some generic bonding description passed over some > >> communication channel into vm. The vm either use it for configuration, > >> or ignores it if it is not smart enough/updated enough. > > > >For sure, we could build virtio-bond to pass that info to guests. > > What do you mean by "virtio-bond". virtio_net extension? I mean a new device supplying topology information to guests, with updates whenever VMs are started, stopped or migrated. > > > >Such an advisory mechanism would not be a replacement for the mandatory > >passthrough fallback flag proposed, but OTOH it's much more flexible. > > > >-- > >MST