Thanks Daniel,
It does indeed work for us, we use both a NAT based network config and
an Isolated network config. So far we haven't seen any negative impacts.
For reference this is the very simple patch I did
--- a/src/util/virnetdev.c 2015-07-31 15:46:58.925705063 +0100
+++ b/src/util/virnetdev.c 2015-07-31 15:47:13.545901192 +0100
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
#ifdef __linux__
# include <linux/sockios.h>
# include <linux/if_vlan.h>
-# define VIR_NETDEV_FAMILY AF_PACKET
+# define VIR_NETDEV_FAMILY AF_LOCAL
#elif defined(HAVE_STRUCT_IFREQ) && defined(AF_LOCAL)
# define VIR_NETDEV_FAMILY AF_LOCAL
#else
Thanks once again,
Ben.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 03:10:24PM +0100, Ben Gray wrote:
Hi,
I've a question on whether it's 'safe' to change the socket type used in
virNetxxx calls from AF_PACKET to AF_LOCAL ?
The reason I ask is that we're using libvirt-lxc with a couple of bridge
interfaces, and we've found that the socket close call on AF_PACKET type
sockets takes between 40ms and 60ms. For our container config there is
roughly 12 close calls on AF_PACKET sockets, delaying the start-up of the
LXC container by around 450ms.
So a simple fix to speed up our container start-up is to just switch
from AF_PACKET to AF_LOCAL sockets. Hence my question on whether we can
safely do this, or is there some reason why AF_PACKET was chosen ?
AFAIK, there's no particular reason why we chose AF_PACKET - we were
probably just copying code somewhere else. Looking at the kernel code
it seems the various ioctls() we do are accepted on any type of socket
family. So if AF_LOCAL works, I don't see a reason not to change it.
We should probably test old distro like RHEL5 to be sure there's no
historical reason for it though.
Regards,
Daniel
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list