Re: copyless virtio net thoughts?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Simon Horman (horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:08:00PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > 2) Direct NIC attachment This is particularly interesting with SR-IOV or
> > other multiqueue nics, but for boutique cases or benchmarks, could be for
> > normal NICs.  So far I have some very sketched-out patches: for the
> > attached nic dev_alloc_skb() gets an skb from the guest (which supplies
> > them via some kind of AIO interface), and a branch in netif_receive_skb()
> > which returned it to the guest.  This bypasses all firewalling in the
> > host though; we're basically having the guest process drive the NIC
> > directly.
> 
> Can I clarify that the idea with utilising SR-IOV would be to assign
> virtual functions to guests? That is, something conceptually similar to
> PCI pass-through in Xen (although I'm not sure that anyone has virtual
> function pass-through working yet). If so, wouldn't this also be useful
> on machines that have multiple NICs?

This would be the typical usecase for sr-iov.  But I think Rusty is
referring to giving a nic "directly" to a guest but the guest is still
seeing a virtio nic (not pass-through/device-assignment).  So there's
no bridge, and zero copy so the dma buffers are supplied by guest,
but host has the driver for the physical nic or the VF.

thanks,
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux