On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:22:36PM CET, loseweigh@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > [...] > >>>> >>>> No, that's not what I was talking about of course. I thought you >>>> mentioned the upgrade scenario this patch would like to address is to >>>> use the bypass interface "to take the place of the original virtio, >>>> and get udev to rename the bypass to what the original virtio_net >>>> was". That is one of the possible upgrade paths for sure. However the >>>> upgrade path I was seeking is to use the bypass interface to take the >>>> place of original VF interface while retaining the name and network >>>> configs, which generally can be done simply with kernel upgrade. It >>>> would become limiting as this patch makes the bypass interface share >>>> the same virtio pci device with virito backup. Can this bypass >>>> interface be made general to take place of any pci device other than >>>> virtio-net? This will be more helpful as the cloud users who has >>>> existing setup on VF interface don't have to recreate it on virtio-net >>>> and VF separately again. > > How that could work? If you have the VF netdev with all configuration > including IPs and routes and whatever - now you want to do migration > so you add virtio_net and do some weird in-driver bonding with it. But > then, VF disappears and the VF netdev with that and also all > configuration it had. > I don't think this scenario is valid. We are talking about making udev aware of the new virtio-bypass to rebind the name of the old VF interface with supposedly virtio-bypass *post the kernel upgrade*. Of course, this needs virtio-net backend to supply the [bdf] info where the VF/PT device was located. -Siwei > > >>> >>> >>> Yes. This sounds interesting. Looks like you want an existing VM image with >>> VF only configuration to get transparent live migration support by adding >>> virtio_net with BACKUP feature. We may need another feature bit to switch >>> between these 2 options. >> >>Yes, that's what I was thinking about. I have been building something >>like this before, and would like to get back after merging with your >>patch. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
