[virtio-dev] Re: [virtio-comment] Re: About custom device counter

Michael S. Tsirkin
2023-06-16T14:42:19Z

On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 09:36:45AM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 08:57:01 +0800, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 2:34 PM Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 05:02:01 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 07:27:15PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 02:25:42 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:12:35PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > > > > > > We hope to support device custom counter. That is, virtio spec provides a
> > > > > > > channel for driver and device, and both key and value are provided by device.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We discussed this issue earlier, and after some internal practice, I think it is
> > > > > > > still necessary to discuss this again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is very important, each cloud vendor will always have some special counters,
> > > > > > > these counters may not exist in another vendor. At the same time, if we have
> > > > > > > to discuss it in the spec every time we add a counter, or add a feature, I
> > > > > > > think it is very inconvenient. Manufacturers may add some new counters at any
> > > > > > > time based on some new requirements. Some counters may also be removed at any
> > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Of course I know that doing this might hurt migration. But what I want to say is,
> > > > > > > why does it affect live migration? These counters we plan to give to users
> > > > > > > through ethtool -S, and some changes have taken place in the ethtool counters
> > > > > > > output by users. Does this have any practical impact? Or do we directly use
> > > > > > > some other output in a way, we can clearly tell the user that these counters
> > > > > > > may change during the migration process. For example, the driver is migrated
> > > > > > > to some new devices. These devices support some new counters. I think users
> > > > > > > should be able to see these new counters. These new counters may be the
> > > > > > > purpose of the migration.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We don't need to support live migration at this point.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why not just document the thing?
> > > > >
> > > > > Device Counter or Device Stat, we discussed this issue earlier,
> > > > > So I want to slove the problem migration firstly.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry have trouble parsing this.
> > > >
> > > > Can we get examples of counters from various vendors, so that
> > > > it's clear what kind of thing this, and it becomes convincing
> > > > that abstracting this in virtio spec is pointless?
> > >
> > > Such as "limit", in a cloud scenario, multiple users purchase different VMs, and
> > > these VMs share the capabilities of the same host. In order to ensure that each
> > > VM will not affect others, the network card(virtio-net) capability of each VM is
> > > limited. When these users purchase VMs, this limit has already been determined.
> > > So if the network card traffic of a vm exceeds the upper limit, packet loss will
> > > occur. It is necessary for us to count these packet losses. And the device
> > > should expose to the user.
> > >
> > >
> > > Such as "session", our dpu supports tcp connection tracking, but there is an
> > > upper limit to the number of connections, and if it exceeds, packet loss will
> > > also occur.
> > >
> > > These are two commonly used scenarios, I hope they can help you.
> >
> > But you didn't explain why these can't be abstracted in the virtio spec?
>
>
> As far as I know, there are no such concepts, and I don't like to force these
> concepts to be abstracted.
>
> Instead of forcing abstraction, I think it is more convenient to directly
> provide a vendor channel.
>
> Thanks.

Bypassing standartiziation always seems convenient short term.

>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Also, am I right assuming that in virtualized settings this is mostly
> > > > relevant for hosts? E.g. guests see a vendor neutral virtio but
> > > > host wants to figure out source of issues?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > MST
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
> > > > > > OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
> > > > > > to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
> > > > > > before posting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Subscribe: virtio-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: virtio-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > List help: virtio-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > List archive: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/
> > > > > > Feedback License: https://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
> > > > > > List Guidelines: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/mailing-lists
> > > > > > Committee: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/
> > > > > > Join OASIS: https://www.oasis-open.org/join/
> > > > > >
> > > >