On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 03:45:49PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
This adds
1) SEQPACKET ops for virtio transport and 'seqpacket_allow()' callback.
2) Handling of SEQPACKET bit: guest tries to negotiate it with vhost.
Signed-off-by: Arseny Krasnov <arseny.krasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
v7 -> v8:
- This patch merged with patch which adds SEQPACKET feature bit to
virtio transport.
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
index 2700a63ab095..ee99bd919a12 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
@@ -443,6 +443,8 @@ static void virtio_vsock_rx_done(struct virtqueue
*vq)
queue_work(virtio_vsock_workqueue, &vsock->rx_work);
}
+static bool virtio_transport_seqpacket_allow(void);
+
static struct virtio_transport virtio_transport = {
.transport = {
.module = THIS_MODULE,
@@ -469,6 +471,10 @@ static struct virtio_transport virtio_transport = {
.stream_is_active = virtio_transport_stream_is_active,
.stream_allow = virtio_transport_stream_allow,
+ .seqpacket_dequeue = virtio_transport_seqpacket_dequeue,
+ .seqpacket_enqueue = virtio_transport_seqpacket_enqueue,
+ .seqpacket_allow = virtio_transport_seqpacket_allow,
+
.notify_poll_in = virtio_transport_notify_poll_in,
.notify_poll_out =
virtio_transport_notify_poll_out,
.notify_recv_init = virtio_transport_notify_recv_init,
@@ -483,8 +489,14 @@ static struct virtio_transport virtio_transport = {
},
.send_pkt = virtio_transport_send_pkt,
+ .seqpacket_allow = false
};
+static bool virtio_transport_seqpacket_allow(void)
+{
+ return virtio_transport.seqpacket_allow;
+}
+
static void virtio_transport_rx_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct virtio_vsock *vsock =
@@ -612,6 +624,10 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
rcu_assign_pointer(the_virtio_vsock, vsock);
mutex_unlock(&the_virtio_vsock_mutex);
+
+ if (vdev->features & (1ULL << VIRTIO_VSOCK_F_SEQPACKET))
+ virtio_transport.seqpacket_allow = true;
+
virtio-vsock devices can be hot-plugged and hot-unplugged, so we should
reset virtio_transport.seqpacket_allow at every probe.
Now thinking about it more, would it be better to save this information
in struct virtio_vsock instead of struct virtio_transport?
return 0;
out:
@@ -695,6 +711,7 @@ static struct virtio_device_id id_table[] = {
};
static unsigned int features[] = {
+ VIRTIO_VSOCK_F_SEQPACKET
};
static struct virtio_driver virtio_vsock_driver = {
--
2.25.1
